Faculty Bibliography

Low-flow vascular malformations are congenital lesions that can occur throughout the body. Treatment of these lesions is indicated to ameliorate pain, cosmetic disfigurement, and functional impairment. The first-line treatment of low-flow vascular malformations is percutaneous sclerotherapy. Traditionally, sclerotherapy is performed with a combination of ultrasound and fluoroscopy. However, malformations that are deep in the abdomen and pelvis or are obscured by overlying fascia or scar may be difficult to be visualized with ultrasound and fluoroscopy. MR-guided sclerotherapy has emerged as an alternative modality that can be used to needle guidance and sclerosant monitoring. In this review, we discuss the historical and current use of MR-guided sclerotherapy for the treatment of low-flow vascular malformations.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To assess high-bandwidth and compressed sensing-(CS)-SEMAC turbo spin echo (TSE) techniques for metal artifact reduction MRI of total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) implants. METHODS:Following institutional approval and consent, 40 subjects with TAA implants underwent 1.5-T MRI prospectively. Evaluations included bone-implant interfaces, anatomical structures, abnormal findings and differential diagnoses before and after MRI. AUCs of P-P plots were used to determine superiority. Statistical differences were evaluated with McNemar and chi-square tests. P-values ≤ 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS:CS-SEMAC TSE was superior to high-bandwidth TSE in showing the bone-implant interfaces (AUC=0.917), periprosthetic bone, tendons and joint capsule (AUC=0.337-0.766), bone marrow oedema (43 % difference, p=0.041), interface osteolysis (63 %, p=0.015), tendinopathy (62 %, p=0.062), periprosthetic fractures (60 %, p=0.250), synovitis (43 %, p=0.250), as well as reader confidence for bone marrow oedema (p=<0.001), fracture (p=0.001), interface osteolysis (p=0.003), synovitis (p=0.027) and tendinopathy (p=0.034). The number of differential diagnoses in symptomatic subjects after the MRI with CS-SEMAC decreased from 3 (1-4) to 1 (1-2) (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:MRI of TAA implants with CS-SEMAC improves the diagnosis of interface osteolysis, periprosthetic bone marrow oedema, fractures and tendinopathy when compared to high-BW TSE, and has a positive effect on patient management. KEY POINTS/CONCLUSIONS:• High-bandwidth TSE and compressed sensing SEMAC improve MRI of ankle arthroplasty implants. • Compressed sensing SEMAC improves bone-implant interfaces, periprosthetic bone, tendons and joint capsule visibility. • Compressed sensing SEMAC improves the diagnosis of osteolysis, tendinopathy, fractures and synovitis. • MRI decreases the number of clinical differential diagnoses of painful ankle arthroplasty implants.

BACKGROUND:Interventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 3T benefits from higher spatial and temporal resolution, but artifacts of metallic instruments are often larger and may obscure target structures. PURPOSE:To test that compressed sensing (CS) slice-encoding metal artifact correction (SEMAC) is feasible for 3T interventional MRI and affords more accurate instrument visualization than turbo spin echo (TSE) and gradient echo (GRE) techniques, and facilitates faster data acquisition than conventional SEMAC. STUDY TYPE:Prospective. PHANTOM AND SUBJECTS:Cadaveric animal and 20 human subjects. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE:TSE (acquisition time 31 sec), GRE (28-33 sec), SEMAC (128 sec), and CS-SEMAC (57 sec) pulse sequences were evaluated at 3T. ASSESSMENT:Artifact width and length, signal-to-noise (SNR), and contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratios of 14-22G MR-conditional needles were measured in a phantom. Subsequently, high-bandwidth TSE and CS-SEMAC sequences were assessed in vivo with 20 patient procedures for the size of the metal artifact, image sharpness, image noise, motion artifacts, image contrast, and target, instrument, and structural visibility. STATISTICAL TESTS:Repeated-measures-analysis-of-variances and Mann-Whitney U-tests were applied. P ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS:CS-SEMAC and SEMAC created the smallest needle artifact widths (3.2-3.3 ± 0.4 mm, P = 1.0), whereas GRE showed the largest needle artifact widths (8.5-8.6 ± 0.4 mm) (P < 0.001). The artifact width difference between high-bandwidth TSE and CS-SEMAC was 0.8 ± 0.6 mm (P < 0.01). SEMAC and CS-SEMAC created the lowest average needle tip errors (0.3-0.4 ± 0.1 mm, P = 1.0). The average tip error difference between high-bandwidth TSE and SEMAC/CS-SEMAC was 2.0 ± 1.7 mm (P < 0.01). SNR and CNR were similar on TSE, SEMAC, and CS-SEMAC, and lowest on GRE. CS-SEMAC yielded smaller artifacts, less noise, less motion, and better instrument visibility (P < 0.001); high-bandwidth TSE showed better sharpness (P < 0.001) and targets visibility (P = 0.007); whereas image contrast (P = 0.273) and structural visibility (P = 0.1) were similar. DATA CONCLUSION:CS-SEMAC is feasible for interventional MRI at 3T, visualizes instruments with higher accuracy than high-bandwidth TSE and GRE, and can be acquired 55% faster than conventional SEMAC. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 6 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1306-1315.

OBJECTIVE:To assess the feasibility of greater occipital nerve (GON) intermediate site infiltration with MRI guidance. METHODS:Eleven consecutive patients suffering from chronic refractory cranio-facial pain who underwent 16 GON infiltrations were included in this prospective study. All of the procedures were performed on an outpatient basis in the research facility of our institution, with a 1.5 T scanner. The fatty space between inferior obliquus and semispinalis muscles at C1-C2 level was defined as the target. Technical success was defined as the ability to accurately inject the products at the target, assessed by post-procedure axial and sagittal proton density-weighted sequences. Clinical success was defined as a 50% pain decrease at 1 month. RESULTS:Technical success was 100%. GON was depicted in 6/11 cases on planning MRI sequences. Mean duration of procedure was 22.5 min (range 16-41). Clinical success was obtained in 7/11 included patients (63.6%) with a mean self-reported improvement of 78%. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Interventional MR-guidance for GON infiltration is a feasible technique offering similar results to an already established effective procedure. It may appear as a useful tool in specific populations, such as young patients and repeat infiltrations, and should be considered in these settings. KEY POINTS/CONCLUSIONS:• MR guidance for GON infiltration is a feasible technique. • Preliminary results are in agreement with other guidance modalities. • MR guidance may be seen as a useful tool in specific populations. • Specific populations include young patients and repeat infiltrations. • Target patients may also include patients with potentionally previously reported complications (torticollis).

Multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) scanners that can quickly acquire volumetric datasets composed of isotropic voxels laid the groundwork for the widespread clinical implementation of 3D MDCT reconstructions, with maximum intensity projection (MIP) and volumetric rendering (VR) becoming important parts of the imaging evaluation of patients with a wide variety of pathologic conditions. Recently, a new 3D reconstruction technique known as cinematic rendering (CR) has become available and is now U.S. FDA approved. CR bears fundamental similarities to VR, but utilizes a more complex lighting model to bring about photorealistic reconstructions. While a tremendous amount of work remains to be done in order to understand the advantages and disadvantages of CR in comparison to traditional 3D reconstruction methods, the images themselves are strikingly detailed and can be interactively manipulated to highlight a variety of different tissue types and anatomic structures. In the following pictorial essay, we provide a number of clinical examples of the use of CR in musculoskeletal imaging, including the evaluation of complex fractures, the delineation of the relationship of fractures to adjacent vasculature and overlying soft tissues, and the visualization of vascular and soft tissue injuries.

The original version of this article, published on 12 July 2017, unfortunately contained mistakes. The following corrections have therefore been made in the original.

OBJECTIVE:The open access movement has pushed for greater access to scientific knowledge by expanding access to scientific journal articles. There is limited information about the extent to which open access policies have been adopted by radiology journals. We performed a systematic analysis to ascertain the proportion of radiology journals with open access options. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A search was performed with the assistance of a clinical informationist. Full and mixed English-language diagnostic and interventional radiology Web of Science journals (impact factors > 1.0) were included. Nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, physics, and solicitation-only journals were excluded. Primary outcome was open access option (yes or no) with additional outcomes including presence or absence of embargo, complete or partial copyright transfer, publication fees, and self-archiving policies. Secondary outcomes included journal citations, journal impact factors, immediacy, Eigenfactor, and article influence scores. Independent double readings were performed with differences resolved by consensus, supplemented by contacting editorial staff at each journal. RESULTS:In all, 125 journals were identified; review yielded 49 journals (39%, mean impact factor of 2.61). Thirty-six of the journals had open access options (73.4%), and four journals were exclusively open access (8.2%). Twelve-month embargoes were most commonly cited (90.6%) with 28.6% of journals stating that they did not require a complete transfer of copyright. Prices for open access options ranged from $750 to $4,000 (median $3,000). No statistically significant differences were found in journal impact measures comparing journals with open access options to journals without open access options. CONCLUSIONS:Diagnostic and interventional radiology journals have widely adopted open access options with a few radiology journals being exclusively open access.