American Journal of Neuroradiology 25:835-839, May 2004
© 2004 American Society of Neuroradiology
Technical Note
INTERVENTIONAL
Interventional MR Imaging with an Endospinal Imaging Coil: Preliminary Results with Anatomic Imaging of the Canine and Cadaver Spinal Cord
George Rapparda,b,
Gregory J. Metzgera,c,
Paul T. Weatheralla,b,c,d and
Phillip D. Purdyb,a,d
a Department of Radiology, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX
b Division of Neuroradiology, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX
c Philips Medical Systems, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX
d Mobility Foundation Center, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX
Address correspondence to George Rappard, MD, Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75390-8896
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
Summary: Percutaneous intraspinal navigation (PIN) is a new
minimally invasive approach to the subarachnoid space. Using
conventional radiographic fluoroscopy, entrance is gained to
the lumbar subarachnoid space, allowing navigation throughout
the spinal canal. Using an antenna/guidewire introduced via
PIN, we performed endospinal MR imaging of the thoracic spinal
cord in a cadaver and canine subject. Comparison images were
obtained with an optimal surface coil. PIN allows endospinal
MR imaging of the spinal cord, providing significant signal-to-noise
ratio gains over conventional imaging.
|
Introduction
|
|---|
Percutaneous intraspinal navigation (PIN) has been recently
described as a minimally invasive approach to the subarachnoid
compartment of the spine and brain (
1). MR fluoroscopy has been
used to guide catheters and guidewires introduced into the CNS
through PIN (
2,
3), although MR imaging has not yet been applied
for interventional imaging of the spinal cord. The purpose of
this work was to study the feasibility of anatomic endospinal
MR imaging in a cadaver and canine subject.
|
Description of the Technique
|
|---|
A human cadaver subject was obtained via an institutional willed
body program. A live canine subject was obtained following approval
from the Institutional Animal Care and Research Advisory Committee.
In both subjects, access to the spinal subarachnoid space was
obtained as described elsewhere (
1). A 100-cm-long, 0.032-inch-diameter
loopless antenna/guidewire (Intercept vascular coil; Surgi-Vision,
Gaithersburg, MD) was then advanced to the T4 level.
Imaging was performed on a 1.5-T system with 33 mT/m gradient coils. Several sequences of varying resolution were evaluated for endospinal imaging (Table 1). Images obtained with the endospinal coil were compared with images obtained from a linear surface coil. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was determined for the thoracic spinal cord by using both techniques. The SNR was calculated as follows: mean tissue signal intensity/SD noise.
|
Results
|
|---|
The results of comparing SNR in the thoracic spinal cord for
the surface coil and endospinal coil are shown in
Table 2. Using
a fast spin-echo (FSE) T2-weighted sequence of 0.62 mm
x 0.62
mm (
Fig 1) and 0.39 mm
x 0.39 mm resolution (
Fig 2), SNR gain
with the endospinal coil varied from 193.37% to 164.22%, respectively.
Using a steady-state free precession (SSFP) sequence (
Figs 3 and
4), a 91.58% SNR gain was seen with the endospinal coil.
View larger version (80K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG 1. Axial FSE T2-weighted images of the canine spinal cord obtained at the T4 level (acquisition, 1; TR/TE/flip angle, 1150/110/90°; TSE factor, 35; bandwidth, 375.6 Hz; matrix, 256 x 256 with 90% Fourier in phase [90% image]; section thickness, 3 mm; spatial resolution, 0.62 mm x 0.62 mm and FOV, 16 cm with a reduced field of view [RFOV] of 80% obtained with the endospinal coil [left] and a surface coil [right]). Note the presence of higher cord signal intensity in the endospinal coil images. Arrow denotes artifact from the endospinal coil.
| |
View larger version (69K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG 2. Axial FSE T2-weighted images of a cadaver spine obtained at the T4 level (acquisitions, 1; TR/TE/flip angle, 4055.8/100/90°; TSE factor, 14; bandwidth, 144.7 Hz; matrix, 256 x 256 with 70% image; section thickness, 5 mm; spatial resolution, 0.39 mm x 0.39 mm; and FOV, 10 cm with RFOV of 80%) obtained with endospinal coil [left] and surface coil [right]). Arrow denotes artifact from the endospinal coil. Although the image obtained with endospinal coil has smaller usable FOV, there is greater calculated SNR of the spinal cord.
| |
View larger version (106K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG 3. Sagittal SSFP imaging of the cadaver spine (acquisitions, 3; TR/TE/flip angle, 3.7/1.85/55°; bandwidth, 997.8 Hz; matrix, 192 x 256 with 50% image; projection slab, 15 mm; spatial resolution, 0.98 mm x 0.98 mm; and FOV, 25 cm with RFOV of 75% performed with endospinal coil [left] and surface coil [right]). Arrow denotes the endospinal coil positioned within the spinal canal. Note the greater presence of signal intensity available within the spinal canal in the endospinal coil images. Increased CSF signal intensity in endospinal coil image improves cord delineation.
| |
View larger version (47K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG 4. Axial SSFP images of the cadaver spine obtained at the T4 level (acquisitions, 3; TR/TE/flip angle, 3.7/1.85/55°; bandwidth, 997.8 Hz; matrix, 192 x 256 with 50% image; projection slab, 15 mm; spatial resolution, 0.98 mm x 0.98 mm; and FOV, 25 cm with RFOV of 75%). Note the significantly greater amount of canal and cord signal intensity present with the endospinal coil (left) versus the surface coil (right).
| |
High-resolution FSE T2-weighted images of the canine thoracic spinal cord were obtained with the endospinal coil (Fig 5). Using an FSE T2-weighted sequence with a spatial resolution of 0.23 mm x 0.23 mm x 3 mm, anatomic images were obtained with an SNR of 18.03.
View larger version (133K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG 5. Axial high-resolution FSE T2-weighted image of the canine cord obtained at the T4 level (acquisitions, 1; TR/TE/flip angle, 4000/100/90°; TSE factor, 12; bandwidth, 128.9 Hz; matrix, 256 x 256 with 70% image; section thickness, 3 mm; spatial resolution, 0.23 mm x 0.23 mm; and FOV, 6 cm with RFOV of 70%) obtained with endospinal coil. Arrow denotes artifact from endospinal coil in dorsal subarachnoid space.
| |
Sagittal imaging allowed the exploitation of the cylindrical usable field of view (FOV) available from the endospinal coil (Fig 6). These images well depict paraspinal soft tissues, including nerve roots.
View larger version (110K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG 6. Sagittal (right) and parasagittal (left) FSE T2-weighted images of the canine spine (acquisitions, 1; TR/TE/flip angle, 3000/100/90°; TSE factor, 12; bandwidth, 121 Hz; matrix, 256 x 256 with 80% image; section thickness, 3 mm; spatial resolution, 0.39 mm x 0.31 mm; and FOV, 8 cm with RFOV of 70%) obtained with endospinal coil. Asterisks denote disk spaces and arrows denote neural foramina.
| |
Using the endospinal coil, there is signal intensity inhomogeneity within the FOV with high signal intensity immediately adjacent to the antenna/guidewire and a signal intensity drop-off with increasing distance from the antenna. This signal intensity drop-off is due to decreasing sensitivity with increasing radial distance from the endospinal coil; however, the use of the endospinal coil and a 0.62 mm x 0.62 mm spatial resolution turbo spin factor (TSE) sequence still allowed a 71.15% gain in SNR over the surface coil in portions of the spinal cord most remote from the endospinal coil.
The use of a canine model allowed for the evaluation of degrading artifact due to CSF pulsation. There was no degrading pulsation artifact noted, and cadaver and canine images were similar in quality.
|
Discussion
|
|---|
Several authors have described the use of an internal coil used
for invasive MR imaging. Hurst et al (
4) studied the use of
various catheter-based coil configurations by using simulations
and phantom experiments. In situ (cadaver) and in vivo imaging
of canine iliofemoral arteries were then carried out. Martin
and Henkelman (
5) constructed an opposed solenoid receiver coil
and obtained images of the aorta in a series of five pigs. The
authors noted that layers within the artery wall could be discerned
with this technique. This group later studied the use of an
endovascular receiver coil in the imaging of excised human arteries
and correlated their findings with histologic analysis. The
authors found that MR imaging findings correlated well with
histologic findings in normal and diseased arteries (
6,
7).
Correia et al (
8) used a loopless catheter antenna to image
isolated segments of 11 thoracic human aortas. Intravascular
MR imaging was compared with surface coil MR imaging and histopathologic
analysis of atherosclerotic plaque composition. Botnar et al
(
9) recently demonstrated the feasibility of in vivo endovascular
coronary artery imaging in a swine model by using a loopless
antenna. Compared with a surface coil, the authors noted a 70%
improvement in SNR 5 mm from the vessel center. The use of the
loopless/antenna guidewire design for neurologic imaging has
been described elsewhere by Rappard et al (
2) in the setting
of MR-guided intracranial navigation, in which the device was
used as an actively tracked guidewire, capable of simultaneous
fluoroscopic brain imaging. The use of a similar device in the
setting of endospinal imaging has not been reported.
The loopless antenna/guidewire used in this experiment is a 0.032-inch-diameter nickel-titanium alloy (nitinol)–based receiver and transmit coil (Fig 7). The antenna is 8 cm in length and is attached to a coaxial cable, giving a total length of 100 cm. The active portion of the guidewire is sensitive to signal intensity along its entire length. The antenna consists of two parallel conductors, connected at one end, lying in a dielectric medium and forming a dipole antenna. Tuning, matching, and decoupling circuits are placed outside of the guidewire on the proximal end of a coaxial cable, allowing a small antenna diameter. Sensitivity of the loopless antenna is greatest when the antenna is oriented parallel to the main external magnetic field (10).
View larger version (99K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG 7. The endospinal coil used in this experiment is a 0.032-inch loopless antenna/guidewire consisting of an 8-cm-long dipole antenna connected to a 92-cm first coaxial cable. Tuning and matching circuits are external. Second coaxial cable connects the apparatus to MR receiver by means of an adapter.
| |
High-resolution imaging of the spinal cord has been difficult to achieve with adequate image quality because of the limitations of decreasing signal intensity with decreasing voxel size. The substantial SNR gains seen in endospinal MR allow some of that SNR to be traded for higher spatial resolution. As a result, high-resolution endospinal MR images can be obtained with SNR in the range of conventional resolution images. It should be noted that the sequences used in this study were not optimized to distinguish gray matter from white matter. Rather, the goal was to obtain anatomic images in a reasonable amount of time that could be used for purposes of comparing SNR. In fact, with the exception of the ultrafast SSFP sequence, only one excitation was used. Though not demonstrated here, the superior SNR of the endospinal coil would be expected to produce improved gray-white matter distinction to conventional imaging with the use of an optimized sequence and within the usable FOV. One caveat is that, because of the high signal intensity immediately adjacent to the coil, saturation effects can occur, limiting contrast. This has been overcome experimentally with the use of a sensitivity-correction algorithm (9).
Comparison was made with a C3 linear surface coil because it was thought that its performance would approach the ideal SNR achievable with available surface coils for imaging of the canine spinal cord. The ideal coil will possess a radius equal to the coil-cord distance. The radius of the opening in the C3 coil is 5.5 cm in diameter, similar to the 5–6-cm depth of the cadaver and canine cord from the surface of the skin at the thoracic level. While not available, a similar-sized quadrature coil would increase signal intensity only by the square root of 2, still falling significantly short of the endospinal coil. Phased array coils were not used because our region of interest was small enough to negate the advantage of added coverage of the phased array.
Although the endospinal coil demonstrated improved image quality while obtaining high-resolution images, what constitutes adequate image quality is yet to be determined. Further study is required to determine threshold contrast and SNR required for detection of pathologic conditions of the cord. We expect to apply the endospinal imaging technique to a canine model of spinal cord injury (11) to obtain useful information on endospinal imaging of cord edema and contusion. Such experiments are expected to prove useful in establishing a balance between resolution, SNR, and contrast-to-noise ratio when optimizing a sequence for use with the endospinal coil. In addition, our group is conducting ongoing work to exploit the high SNR of the endospinal coil for MR spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted imaging of the spinal cord.
We are able to demonstrate the acquisition of high SNR and high-resolution anatomic images of the spinal cord by use of an endospinal coil. Endospinal MR imaging represents a unique potential opportunity for neurointerventional MR imaging and PIN, especially when one considers that the endospinal coil may also serve as a guidewire during spinal procedures. Although our initial results are promising, future work is required to determine threshold resolution, contrast, and SNR needed to detect various diseases of the spinal cord, as well as the applicability of advanced MR methods to endospinal MR imaging. This will be the focus of future investigation.
|
Acknowledgments
|
|---|
We wish to acknowledge Susan L. Miller, Christina E. Adams,
Donna L. Baer, Brian P. Giles, and Ingmar Viohl for technical
assistance and Leslie Mihal and Terri Tabaniag for assistance
with the preparation of this manuscript.
|
References
|
|---|
- Purdy PD, Replogle RE, Pride GL Jr, et al. Percutaneous intraspinal navigation: feasibility study of a new and minimally invasive approach to the spinal cord and brain in cadavers.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2003; 24
:361
–365[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Rappard G, Metzger GJ, Weatherall PT, et al. MR-guided intracranial navigation using a loopless antenna/guidewire: preliminary results using simultaneous imaging and active tracking. Presented at the 88th annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, December 1–6,2002
, Chicago, IL.
- Rappard G, Metzger GJ, Fleckenstein JL, et al. MR-guided catheter navigation of the intracranial subarachnoid space.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2003; 24
:626
–629[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Hurst GC, Hua J, Duerk JL, Cohen AM. Intravascular (catheter) NMR receiver probe: preliminary design analysis and application to canine iliofemoral imaging.
Magn Reson Med1992; 24
:343
–357[Medline]
- Martin AJ, Henkelman RM. Intravascular MR imaging in a porcine animal model.
Magn Reson Med1994; 32
:224
–229[Medline]
- Martin AJ, Gotlieb AI, Henkelman RM. High-resolution MR imaging of human arteries.
J Magn Reson Imaging1995; 5
:93
–100[Medline]
- Martin AJ, Ryan LK, Gotlieb AI, et al. Arterial imaging: comparison of high-resolution US and MR imaging with histologic correlation.
Radiographics1997; 17
:189
–202[Abstract]
- Correia LC, Atalar E, Kelemen MD, et al. Intravascular magnetic resonance imaging of aortic atherosclerotic plaque composition.
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol1997; 17
:3626
–3632[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Botnar RM, Bucker A, Kim WY, et al. Initial experiences with in vivo intravascular coronary vessel wall imaging.
J Magn Reson Imaging2003; 17
:615
–619[Medline]
- Ocali O, Atalar E. Intravascular magnetic resonance imaging using a loopless catheter antenna.
Magn Reson Med1997; 37
:112
–118[Medline]
- Purdy PD, Duong RT, White CL III, et al. Percutaneous translumbar spinal cord compression injury in a dog model that uses angioplasty balloons: MR imaging and histopathologic findings.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2003; 24
:177
–184[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Received June 19, 2003;
accepted after revision December 11, 2003.
TOP
Abstract
Introduction