Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Magn Reson Imaging ; 59(5): 1514-1522, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37767980

RESUMO

The standard of care for managing a patient with an implant is to identify the item and to assess the relative safety of scanning the patient. Because the 1.5 T MR system is the most prevalent scanner in the world and 3 T is the highest field strength in widespread use, implants typically have "MR Conditional" (i.e., an item with demonstrated safety in the MR environment within defined conditions) labeling at 1.5 and/or 3 T only. This presents challenges for a facility that has a scanner operating at a field strength below 1.5 T when encountering a patient with an implant, because scanning the patient is considered "off-label." In this case, the supervising physician is responsible for deciding whether to scan the patient based on the risks associated with the implant and the benefit of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For a passive implant, the MRI safety-related concerns are static magnetic field interactions (i.e., force and torque) and radiofrequency (RF) field-induced heating. The worldwide utilization of scanners operating below 1.5 T combined with the increasing incidence of patients with implants that need MRI creates circumstances that include patients potentially being subjected to unsafe imaging conditions or being denied access to MRI because physicians often lack the knowledge to perform an assessment of risk vs. benefit. Thus, physicians must have a complete understanding of the MRI-related safety issues that impact passive implants when managing patients with these products on scanners operating below 1.5 T. This monograph provides an overview of the various clinical MR systems operating below 1.5 T and discusses the MRI-related factors that influence safety for passive implants. Suggestions are provided for the management of patients with passive implants labeled MR Conditional at 1.5 and/or 3 T, referred to scanners operating below 1.5 T. The purpose of this information is to empower supervising physicians with the essential knowledge to perform MRI exams confidently and safely in patients with passive implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.


Assuntos
Campos Magnéticos , Próteses e Implantes , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Imagens de Fantasmas
2.
Cureus ; 14(12): e32105, 2022 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36601170

RESUMO

Background Methods to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa), a highly prevalent disease, remain inadequate in terms of accuracy, cost, and logistical constraints for both patients and providers. Early and accurate detection of PCa is crucial to patient management, most notably in increasing quality of life and lowering cost burdens when considering the associated treatment and follow-up pathways. This article aims to discuss the impact to care pathways for nine patients whose PCa was detected by a novel Food and Drug Administration-cleared low-field magnetic resonance imager (MRI) for transperineal PCa interventions but was missed by standard-of-care systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). Methodology From December 2020 to March 2022, 41 men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, positive digital rectal exam findings, and Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System scores of three or higher were enrolled. Patients first underwent targeted transperineal biopsy guided by a low-field MRI (MRIgTBx) and co-registered with T2-weighted images from a pre-procedural 3-T MRI with suspicious lesions annotated by a board-certified radiologist. Following this procedure, patients underwent standard-of-care systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSgSBx). The entire procedure was supervised by a board-certified urologist. Results Of the 41 enrolled patients, both MRIgTBx and TRUSgSBx biopsies detected PCa in 20 patients. MRIgTBx detected PCa in an additional nine patients that were missed by TRUSgSBx. Five of the nine patients elected to pursue immediate treatment. Patients with suspected PCa and a negative biopsy return to the clinic every three to six months for PSA tests, with additional biopsies performed every year for cases with increasing PSA levels. Conclusions Early detection of PCa in nine of the 41 patients using a novel MRIgTBx method has allowed for change management resulting in an improved quality of life and cost saving for those who opted for immediate treatment. Early intervention in cases where the standard-of-care TRUSgSBx treatment was falsely negative ultimately led to a decrease in additional screening procedures, biopsies, associated tests, and an improved pathway for patient management.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA