Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Year of publication
- 2015 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Journal article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Keywords
- Crohn’s disease (1)
- Dixon (1)
- VIBE (1)
- breath-hold (1)
- clinical application (1)
- gadoxetic acid (1)
- general anaesthesia (1)
- small bowel MRI (1)
- standard (1)
The aim of this study was to explore the applicability of fast MR techniques to routine paediatric abdominopelvic MRI at 1.5 Tesla. "Controlled Aliasing in Parallel Imaging Results in Higher Acceleration-" (CAIPIRINHA-) accelerated contrast-enhanced-T1w 3D FLASH imaging was compared to standard T1w 2D FLASH imaging with breath-holding in 40 paediatric patients and to respiratory-triggered T1w TSE imaging in 10 sedated young children. In 20 nonsedated patients, we compared T2w TIRM to fat-saturated T2w HASTE imaging. Two observers performed an independent and blinded assessment of overall image quality. Acquisition time was reduced by the factor of 15 with CAIPIRINHA-accelerated T1w FLASH and by 7 with T2w HASTE. With CAIPIRINHA and with HASTE, there were significantly less motion artefacts in nonsedated patients. In sedated patients, respiratory-triggered T1w imaging in general showed better image quality. However, satisfactory image quality was achieved with CAIPIRINHA in two sedated patients where respiratory triggering failed. In summary, fast scanning with CAIPIRINHA and HASTE presents a reliable high quality alternative to standard sequences in paediatric abdominal MRI. Paediatric patients, in particular, benefit greatly from fast image acquisition with less breath-hold cycles or shorter sedation.
Aims
To survey the perceived indications for magnetic resonance imaging of the small bowel (MRE) by experts, when MR enteroclysis (MREc) or MR enterography (MREg) may be chosen, and to determine how the approach to MRE is modified when general anaesthesia (GA) is required.
Materials and methods
Selected opinion leaders in MRE completed a questionnaire that included clinical indications (MREg or MREc), specifics regarding administration of enteral contrast, and how the technique is altered to accommodate GA.
Results
Fourteen responded. Only the diagnosis and follow-up of Crohn’s disease were considered by over 80 % as a valid MRE indication. The remaining indications ranged between 35.7 % for diagnosis of caeliac disease and unknown sources of gastrointestinal bleeding to 78.6 % for motility disorders. The majority chose MREg over MREc for all indications (from 100 % for follow-up of caeliac disease to 57.7 % for tumour diagnosis). Fifty per cent of responders had needed to consider MRE under GA. The most commonly recommended procedural change was MRI without enteral distention. Three had experience with intubation under GA (MREc modification).
Conclusion
Views were variable. Requests for MRE under GA are not uncommon. Presently most opinion leaders suggest standard abdominal MRI when GA is required.