Literature DB >> 26084475

Influence of pulse sequence parameters at 1.5 T and 3.0 T on MRI artefacts produced by metal-ceramic restorations.

A R G Cortes1,2, R Abdala-Junior3, M Weber3, E S Arita3, J L Ackerman1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Susceptibility artefacts from dental materials may compromise MRI diagnosis. However, little is known regarding MRI artefacts of dental material samples with the clinical shapes used in dentistry. The present phantom study aims to clarify how pulse sequences and sequence parameters affect MRI artefacts caused by metal-ceramic restorations.
METHODS: A phantom consisting of nickel-chromium metal-ceramic restorations (i.e. dental crowns and fixed bridges) and cylindrical reference specimens immersed in agar gel was imaged in 1.5 and 3.0 T MRI scanners. Gradient echo (GRE), spin echo (SE) and ultrashort echo time (UTE) pulse sequences were used. The artefact area in each image was automatically calculated from the pixel values within a region of interest. Mean values for similar pulse sequences differing in one parameter at a time were compared. A comparison between mean artefact area at 1.5 and 3.0 T, and from GRE and SE was also carried out. In addition, a parametric correlation between echo time (TE) and artefact area was performed.
RESULTS: A significant correlation was found between TE and artefact area in GRE images. Higher receiver bandwidth significantly reduced artefact area in SE images. UTE images yielded the smallest artefact area at 1.5 T. In addition, a significant difference in mean artefact area was found between images at 1.5 and 3.0 T field strengths (p = 0.028) and between images from GRE and SE pulse sequences (p = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to compensate the effect of higher field strength on MRI artefacts by setting optimized pulse sequences for scanning patients with metal-ceramic restorations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  artifact; magnetic resonance imaging; metal-ceramic restorations; pulse sequence

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26084475      PMCID: PMC4628425          DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20150136

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol        ISSN: 0250-832X            Impact factor:   2.419


  18 in total

1.  A quantitative study of the pixel-shifting, blurring and nonlinear distortions in MRI images caused by the presence of metal implants.

Authors:  F M Bui; K Bott; M P Mintchev
Journal:  J Med Eng Technol       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb

2.  Fast multi-planar gradient echo MR imaging: impact of variation in pulse sequence parameters on image quality and artifacts.

Authors:  Tao Li; Scott A Mirowitz
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.546

3.  Magnetic resonance imaging artifacts caused by aneurysm clips and shunt valves: dependence on field strength (1.5 and 3 T) and imaging parameters.

Authors:  Johan Olsrud; Jimmy Lätt; Sara Brockstedt; Bertil Romner; Isabella M Björkman-Burtscher
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Assessment of the sinus lift operation by magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Figen Cizmeci Senel; Serpil Duran; Onur Icten; Izlem Izbudak; Fulya Cizmeci
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2006-03-15       Impact factor: 1.651

Review 5.  The role of magnetic susceptibility in magnetic resonance imaging: MRI magnetic compatibility of the first and second kinds.

Authors:  J F Schenck
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Correlation between magnetic resonance imaging disturbances and the magnetic susceptibility of dental materials.

Authors:  O Beuf; M Lissac; Y Crémillieux; A Briguet
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 5.304

7.  Susceptibility artefacts in NMR imaging.

Authors:  K M Lüdeke; P Röschmann; R Tischler
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 2.546

8.  Magnetic resonance imaging of cortical bone with ultrashort TE pulse sequences.

Authors:  Ines L H Reichert; Matthew D Robson; Peter D Gatehouse; Taigang He; Karyn E Chappell; Joanne Holmes; Samia Girgis; Graeme M Bydder
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.546

9.  Quantitative analysis of magnetic resonance imaging susceptibility artifacts caused by neurosurgical biomaterials: comparison of 0.5, 1.5, and 3.0 Tesla magnetic fields.

Authors:  Hideki Matsuura; Takashi Inoue; Kuniaki Ogasawara; Makoto Sasaki; Hiromu Konno; Yasutaka Kuzu; Hideaki Nishimoto; Akira Ogawa
Journal:  Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo)       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.742

10.  Ultrashort echo time (UTE) MRI for the assessment of caries lesions.

Authors:  A-K Bracher; C Hofmann; A Bornstedt; E Hell; F Janke; J Ulrici; B Haller; M-A Geibel; V Rasche
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2013-02-18       Impact factor: 2.419

View more
  7 in total

1.  Evaluation and reduction of magnetic resonance imaging artefacts induced by distinct plates for osseous fixation: an in vitro study @ 3 T.

Authors:  Carsten Rendenbach; Max Schoellchen; Julie Bueschel; Tobias Gauer; Jan Sedlacik; Daniel Kutzner; Pekka K Vallittu; Max Heiland; Ralf Smeets; Jens Fiehler; Susanne Siemonsen
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 2.419

2.  Assessment of alveolar bone marrow fat content using 15 T MRI.

Authors:  Arthur Rodriguez Gonzalez Cortes; Ouri Cohen; Ming Zhao; Eduardo Massaharu Aoki; Rodrigo Alves Ribeiro; Lina Abu Nada; Claudio Costa; Emiko Saito Arita; Faleh Tamimi; Jerome L Ackerman
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol       Date:  2017-11-21

3.  Diffusion-weighted MRI for differentiation between sialadenitis and pleomorphic adenoma.

Authors:  Guilherme T C Terra; Jefferson X D Oliveira; Adalsa Hernandez; Silvia V Lourenço; Emiko S Arita; Arthur R G Cortes
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.419

4.  Correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and cone-beam computed tomography for maxillary sinus graft assessment.

Authors:  Fernando Antonio Reis Laurino; Isabela Goulart Gil Choi; Jun Ho Kim; Ivan Onone Gialain; Renato Ferraço; Rainer Guilherme Haetinger; Otavio Henrique Pinhata-Baptista; Reinaldo Abdala-Junior; Claudio Costa; Arthur Rodriguez Gonzalez Cortes
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2020-06-18

5.  Susceptibility artifacts induced by crowns of different materials with prepared teeth and titanium implants in magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Xiaomeng Gao; Qianbing Wan; Qingping Gao
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Influence of receiver bandwidth on MRI artifacts caused by orthodontic brackets composed of different alloys.

Authors:  Reinaldo Abdala-Junior; Juliana No-Cortes; Emiko Saito Arita; Jerome L Ackerman; Renan Lúcio Berbel da Silva; Jun Ho Kim; Arthur Rodriguez Gonzalez Cortes
Journal:  Imaging Sci Dent       Date:  2021-08-11

Review 7.  Unwanted effects due to interactions between dental materials and magnetic resonance imaging: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Sherin Jose Chockattu; Deepak Byathnal Suryakant; Sophia Thakur
Journal:  Restor Dent Endod       Date:  2018-08-30
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.