Brain and spine MRI artifacts at 3Tesla.

INTRODUCTION We illustrate here the most common MRI artifacts found on routine 3T clinical neuroradiology that can simulate pathology and interfere with diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Our group has worked with a 3-T Magnetom Trio (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) system for two years, with 50% of our time devoted to clinical work and 50% dedicated to research; 65% of the clinical time is dedicated to neuroradiology (2705 patients) and the remaining time to whole-body MRI. We have detected these artifacts during our case readings and have selected the most representative of each type to illustrate here. RESULTS We have observed magnetic susceptibility artifacts (29%), pulsation artifacts (57%), homogeneity artifacts (3%), motion artifacts (6%), truncation artifacts (3%) and, finally, artifacts due to poor or inadequate technique in the examined region. CONCLUSION High-field imaging offers the benefit of a higher signal-to-noise ratio, thus making possible the options of a higher imaging matrix, thinner slices, the use of spectroscopy and diffusion tensor imaging in the routine clinical neuroradiology with a reduction in time spent. It is vital to be able to recognize these artifacts in everyday practice as they can mimic pathological appearances, thus causing diagnostic errors that could lead to unnecessary treatment. Indeed, most of these artifacts could be avoided with an adequate technique.

[1]  E. Jeong,et al.  Minimizing artifacts caused by metallic implants at MR imaging: experimental and clinical studies. , 1998, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  I. Idy-Peretti,et al.  Cerebrospinal Fluid Dynamics and Relation with Blood Flow: A Magnetic Resonance Study with Semiautomated Cerebrospinal Fluid Segmentation , 2001, Investigative radiology.

[3]  3T magnetic resonance arteriography in pediatric cerebrovascular disease. , 2007, Journal of neuroradiology. Journal de neuroradiologie.

[4]  Wolfgang Schima,et al.  Artifacts in body MR imaging: their appearance and how to eliminate them , 2007, European Radiology.

[5]  V M Haughton,et al.  Characteristic features of MR truncation artifacts. , 1988, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[6]  P Jissendi,et al.  Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and tractography of the cerebellar projections to prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices: a study at 3T. , 2008, Journal of neuroradiology. Journal de neuroradiologie.

[7]  K. Lyons,et al.  MRI Susceptibility Artefacts Related to Scaphoid Screws: the Effect of Screw Type, Screw Orientation and Imaging Parameters , 2002, Journal of hand surgery.

[8]  Yong-Min Huh,et al.  Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength MR imaging and multi-detector CT. , 2007, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[9]  Hartmut Dickhaus,et al.  Artefacts in magnetic resonance imaging caused by dental material , 2005, Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine.

[10]  W. Bradley,et al.  Flowing cerebrospinal fluid in normal and hydrocephalic states: appearance on MR images. , 1986, Radiology.

[11]  S. Schoenberg,et al.  Artifacts in 3-T MRI: physical background and reduction strategies. , 2008, European journal of radiology.

[12]  W. Peh,et al.  Artifacts in musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging: identification and correction , 2001, Skeletal Radiology.

[13]  Roger J Ordidge,et al.  Design, construction and evaluation of an anthropomorphic head phantom with realistic susceptibility artifacts , 2007, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[14]  G. Frija,et al.  Imagerie par résonance magnétique , 1984 .

[15]  C. Lisanti,et al.  Normal MRI appearance and motion-related phenomena of CSF. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.