Literature DB >> 22198736

Will they fit? Development of a measurement device to assess body habitus compatibility with MRI bore diameter for emergency trauma imaging.

Amanda Corwin1, Adam Aresty, Suzanne Chong, Melissa Brunsvold, James R Evans, R Brent Gillespie, Lena M Napolitano.   

Abstract

Excessive obesity poses a significant limitation to radiographic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), particularly related to aperture or bore diameter due to the patient's girth. Determination of whether a patient will fit into the bore of the MRI scanner is currently accomplished using patient height, weight, and MRI technician experience. These simple methods have proven unreliable. We sought to develop a device and method which could accurately determine whether a patient would fit into the MRI scanner. We developed an MRI template prototype which was tested against the standard radiology methods in a pilot study (n = 6). We then performed a prospective validation study in adult human volunteers (n = 100) to assess the accuracy of the MRI template. We collected height, weight, shoulder and pelvis girth/diameter for each study participant to evaluate the body dimension measurements that would assist in determination of whether a patient would fit into the MRI scanner. Using the MRI template, we determined that 11 of the 100 study participants would not fit in the MRI scanner and 10 were confirmed to not fit into the MRI aperture [positive predictive value (PPV) 0.91 (0.58-0.99); negative predictive value (NPV) 1.00 (0.95-1.00), sensitivity 1.00 (0.69-1.00), specificity 0.99 (0.93-0.99), likelihood ratio positive test 90 (12.81-632), likelihood ratio negative test 0, accuracy 99%]. In comparison, the body measurement method did not perform as well [PPV 0.66 (0.34-0.90), NPV 0.97 (0.92-0.99), sensitivity 0.80 (0.44-0.97), specificity 0.95 (0.89-0.98), likelihood ratio positive test 17.97 (6.56-49.2), likelihood ratio negative test 0.209 (0.06-0.72), accuracy 94%]. This study confirmed that the use of an MRI template is an accurate tool in determining whether an obese patient can fit through the MRI bore and be accommodated in the MRI scanner.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22198736     DOI: 10.1007/s10140-011-1010-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Radiol        ISSN: 1070-3004


  5 in total

1.  MR imaging of excessively obese patients: the use of an open permanent magnet.

Authors:  P A Rothschild; J M Domesek; M E Eastham; L Kaufman
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 2.546

2.  Obesity and medical imaging challenges.

Authors:  April Reynolds
Journal:  Radiol Technol       Date:  2011 Jan-Feb

Review 3.  Impact of obesity on medical imaging and image-guided intervention.

Authors:  Raul N Uppot; Dushyant V Sahani; Peter F Hahn; Debra Gervais; Peter R Mueller
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999-2008.

Authors:  Katherine M Flegal; Margaret D Carroll; Cynthia L Ogden; Lester R Curtin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-01-13       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 5.  Impact of obesity on radiology.

Authors:  Raul N Uppot
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.303

  5 in total
  3 in total

1.  Non-invasive assessment of hepatic steatosis in patients with NAFLD using controlled attenuation parameter and 1H-MR spectroscopy.

Authors:  Thomas Karlas; David Petroff; Nikita Garnov; Stephan Böhm; Hannelore Tenckhoff; Christian Wittekind; Manfred Wiese; Ingolf Schiefke; Nicolas Linder; Alexander Schaudinn; Harald Busse; Thomas Kahn; Joachim Mössner; Thomas Berg; Michael Tröltzsch; Volker Keim; Johannes Wiegand
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-17       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  High-field open versus short-bore magnetic resonance imaging of the spine: a randomized controlled comparison of image quality.

Authors:  Judith Enders; Matthias Rief; Elke Zimmermann; Patrick Asbach; Gerd Diederichs; Christoph Wetz; Eberhard Siebert; Moritz Wagner; Bernd Hamm; Marc Dewey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Evaluation of the radiofrequency performance of a wide-bore 1.5 T positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging body coil for radiotherapy planning.

Authors:  Woutjan Branderhorst; Bart R Steensma; Casper Beijst; Erik R Huijing; Cezar Alborahal; Edwin Versteeg; Bjoern Weissler; David Schug; Pierre Gebhardt; Nicolas Gross-Weege; Florian Mueller; Karl Krueger; Thomas Dey; Harald Radermacher; Oliver Lips; Jan Lagendijk; Volkmar Schulz; Hugo W A M de Jong; Dennis W J Klomp
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-12-23
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.