PURPOSE: To develop an approach to vascular access under magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as a component of comprehensive MRI-guided cardiovascular catheterization and intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We attempted jugular vein access in healthy pigs as a model of "difficult" vascular access. Procedures were performed under real-time MRI guidance using reduced field of view imaging. We developed an "active" MRI antenna-needle having an open-lumen, distinct tip appearance and indicators of depth and trajectory in order to enhance MRI visibility during the procedure. We compared performance of the active needle against an unmodified commercial passively visualized needle, measured by procedure success among operators with different levels of experience. RESULTS: MRI-guided central vein access was feasible using both the active needle and the unmodified passive needle. The active needle required less time (88 vs. 244 sec, P = 0.022) and fewer needle passes (4.5 vs. 9.1, P = 0.028), irrespective of operator experience. CONCLUSION: MRI-guided access to central veins is feasible in our animal model. When image guidance is necessary for vascular access, performing this component under MRI will allow wholly MRI-guided catheterization procedures that do not require adjunctive imaging facilities such as x-ray or ultrasound. The active needle design showed enhanced visibility, as expected. These capabilities may permit more complex catheter-based cardiovascular interventional procedures enabled by enhanced image guidance.
PURPOSE: To develop an approach to vascular access under magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as a component of comprehensive MRI-guided cardiovascular catheterization and intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We attempted jugular vein access in healthy pigs as a model of "difficult" vascular access. Procedures were performed under real-time MRI guidance using reduced field of view imaging. We developed an "active" MRI antenna-needle having an open-lumen, distinct tip appearance and indicators of depth and trajectory in order to enhance MRI visibility during the procedure. We compared performance of the active needle against an unmodified commercial passively visualized needle, measured by procedure success among operators with different levels of experience. RESULTS: MRI-guided central vein access was feasible using both the active needle and the unmodified passive needle. The active needle required less time (88 vs. 244 sec, P = 0.022) and fewer needle passes (4.5 vs. 9.1, P = 0.028), irrespective of operator experience. CONCLUSION: MRI-guided access to central veins is feasible in our animal model. When image guidance is necessary for vascular access, performing this component under MRI will allow wholly MRI-guided catheterization procedures that do not require adjunctive imaging facilities such as x-ray or ultrasound. The active needle design showed enhanced visibility, as expected. These capabilities may permit more complex catheter-based cardiovascular interventional procedures enabled by enhanced image guidance.
Authors: Daniel R Elgort; Eddy Y Wong; Claudia M Hillenbrand; Frank K Wacker; Jonathan S Lewin; Jeffrey L Duerk Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: S C Göhde; T Pfammatter; P Steiner; P Erhart; B J Romanowski; J F Debatin Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 1997 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: S T Kee; J S Rhee; K Butts; B Daniel; J Pauly; A Kerr; G J O'Sullivan; D Y Sze; M K Razavi; C P Semba; R J Herfkens; M D Dake Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 1999-05 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: D A Leung; J F Debatin; S Wildermuth; N Heske; C L Dumoulin; R D Darrow; M Hauser; C P Davis; G K von Schulthess Journal: Radiology Date: 1995-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kanishka Ratnayaka; Toby Rogers; William H Schenke; Jonathan R Mazal; Marcus Y Chen; Merdim Sonmez; Michael S Hansen; Ozgur Kocaturk; Anthony Z Faranesh; Robert J Lederman Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Wei Wang; Charles L Dumoulin; Akila N Viswanathan; Zion T H Tse; Alireza Mehrtash; Wolfgang Loew; Isaiah Norton; Junichi Tokuda; Ravi T Seethamraju; Tina Kapur; Antonio L Damato; Robert A Cormack; Ehud J Schmidt Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-06-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kanishka Ratnayaka; Christina E Saikus; Anthony Z Faranesh; Jamie A Bell; Israel M Barbash; Ozgur Kocaturk; Christine A Reyes; Merdim Sonmez; William H Schenke; Victor J Wright; Michael S Hansen; Michael C Slack; Robert J Lederman Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Toby Rogers; Kanishka Ratnayaka; William H Schenke; Merdim Sonmez; Ozgur Kocaturk; Jonathan R Mazal; Marcus Y Chen; Moshe Y Flugelman; James F Troendle; Anthony Z Faranesh; Robert J Lederman Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 6.546
Authors: Wenpeng Gao; Baichuan Jiang; Daniel F Kacher; Barry Fetics; Erez Nevo; Thomas C Lee; Jagadeesan Jayender Journal: Int J Med Robot Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 2.547
Authors: Majdi Halabi; Anthony Z Faranesh; William H Schenke; Victor J Wright; Michael S Hansen; Christina E Saikus; Ozgur Kocaturk; Robert J Lederman; Kanishka Ratnayaka Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-07-20 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Majdi Halabi; Kanishka Ratnayaka; Anthony Z Faranesh; Michael S Hansen; Israel M Barbash; Michael A Eckhaus; Joel R Wilson; Marcus Y Chen; Michael C Slack; Ozgur Kocaturk; William H Schenke; Victor J Wright; Robert J Lederman Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 5.364