Stuart G Silverman1, Kemal Tuncali, Paul R Morrison. 1. Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging and Intervention, Brigham & Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA. sgsilverman@partners.org
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to compare the feasibility and precision of renal artery angioplasty and stent placement using two different MR scanners. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR imaging-guided angioplasty and stent placements were performed on seven pigs using 0.2 and 1.5 T scanners (Magnetom Open and Magnetom Sonata, Siemens Medical Solutions, Erlangen, Germany). For guidance of catheters, guide wires and stents susceptibility artifact-based tracking was used. The end point of each intervention was to position a stent in the renal artery with its proximal end at the level of the aortic wall. Procedure time and stent position were evaluated. RESULTS: Catheterization, angioplasty, and stent placement were feasible using MRI guidance at both 0.2 and 1,5 Tesla. At 1.5 T all catheter manipulations and interventions were performed in less than 30 minutes. At 0.2 T the interventions took up to 90 minutes. No significant difference in the stent deviation was noted between the two scanners. CONCLUSION: The use of a high-performance 1.5 T scanner helped to reduce the procedure time to half of that of a low-field system. Since no difference in stent placement precision was noted, a dedicated MR-stent might be mandatory for more precise stent placement.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to compare the feasibility and precision of renal artery angioplasty and stent placement using two different MR scanners. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR imaging-guided angioplasty and stent placements were performed on seven pigs using 0.2 and 1.5 T scanners (Magnetom Open and Magnetom Sonata, Siemens Medical Solutions, Erlangen, Germany). For guidance of catheters, guide wires and stents susceptibility artifact-based tracking was used. The end point of each intervention was to position a stent in the renal artery with its proximal end at the level of the aortic wall. Procedure time and stent position were evaluated. RESULTS: Catheterization, angioplasty, and stent placement were feasible using MRI guidance at both 0.2 and 1,5 Tesla. At 1.5 T all catheter manipulations and interventions were performed in less than 30 minutes. At 0.2 T the interventions took up to 90 minutes. No significant difference in the stent deviation was noted between the two scanners. CONCLUSION: The use of a high-performance 1.5 T scanner helped to reduce the procedure time to half of that of a low-field system. Since no difference in stent placement precision was noted, a dedicated MR-stent might be mandatory for more precise stent placement.
Authors: Haytham Elhawary; Sota Oguro; Kemal Tuncali; Paul R Morrison; Servet Tatli; Paul B Shyn; Stuart G Silverman; Nobuhiko Hata Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 3.173