Diagnostic image quality of shoulder magnetic resonance imaging at 0.55T in healthy subjects and patients with rotator cuff injury: Prospective comparison with 1.5T

IF 2.5 4区医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics Pub Date : 2026-10-20 DOI:10.1002/acm2.70825

Jing Liu, Yue Gao, Ge Gao, Wei Li, Xiang Wang, Jinxia Zhu, Xiaoming Liu, Xiaoye Wang, Kun Zhou, Heng Liu, Jianxing Qiu

{"title":"Diagnostic image quality of shoulder magnetic resonance imaging at 0.55T in healthy subjects and patients with rotator cuff injury: Prospective comparison with 1.5T","authors":"Jing Liu, Yue Gao, Ge Gao, Wei Li, Xiang Wang, Jinxia Zhu, Xiaoming Liu, Xiaoye Wang, Kun Zhou, Heng Liu, Jianxing Qiu","doi":"10.1002/acm2.70825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Lower‑field 0.55 T MRI scanners with large‑bore design could offer patients more comfortable feeling and flexible position. With the advances in deep‑learning reconstruction and hardware optimization, 0.55T have greatly improved their image quality and cost‑effectiveness for musculoskeletal applications. However, its feasibility for shoulder evaluation remains unstudied.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate the image quality of shoulder using 0.55T MRI in volunteers and patients with rotator cuff injury with comparison of conventional 1.5T.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Fifty participants (25 volunteers, 25 patients) were prospectively enrolled. All participants underwent shoulder MRI both at open 0.55T with contour coils and deep learning (DL) and 1.5T MR without DL. The nonparametric method was utilized to compare image quality scores and quantitative metrics (signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (|CNR|)). Arthroscopy have been conducted in 16 patients. Kappa statistics was used to assess interobserver and interstudy agreement for lesion evaluation. Comfort feeling was also compared.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The scan time was 11′25″ for 0.55T MRI and 11′42″ for 1.5T MRI. The interobserver analyses showed high consistency (κ = 0.771–1.000, <i>P: 0.008 ∼ </i>< 0.001) among 3 readers. The scores for coronal fat suppressed T2 weighted imaging (fsT2WI) and coronal T1 weighted imaging (T1WI) were significantly higher for 0.55T MRI. Most sequences at 0.55T demonstrated significantly higher SNRs (<i>P:0.04 ∼ </i>< 0.001). Additionally, |CNR| values for lesions were significantly higher in fs proton weighted imaging (PDWI) and fsT2WI at 0.55T. Perfect interstudy agreement between 0.55T and 1.5T was observed between 2 readers (Kappa = 1, <i>P </i>< 0.001) for lesion assessment. Agreement between MRI findings and arthroscopic results was perfect or good. The 0.55T system received higher scores in comfort ratings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The 0.55T MRI with DL, showed comparable or better image quality in healthy subjects and patients with rotator cuff injury to 1.5T MRI without DL.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":"27 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.70825","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.70825","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Lower‑field 0.55 T MRI scanners with large‑bore design could offer patients more comfortable feeling and flexible position. With the advances in deep‑learning reconstruction and hardware optimization, 0.55T have greatly improved their image quality and cost‑effectiveness for musculoskeletal applications. However, its feasibility for shoulder evaluation remains unstudied.

Purpose

To evaluate the image quality of shoulder using 0.55T MRI in volunteers and patients with rotator cuff injury with comparison of conventional 1.5T.

Methods

Fifty participants (25 volunteers, 25 patients) were prospectively enrolled. All participants underwent shoulder MRI both at open 0.55T with contour coils and deep learning (DL) and 1.5T MR without DL. The nonparametric method was utilized to compare image quality scores and quantitative metrics (signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (|CNR|)). Arthroscopy have been conducted in 16 patients. Kappa statistics was used to assess interobserver and interstudy agreement for lesion evaluation. Comfort feeling was also compared.

Results

The scan time was 11′25″ for 0.55T MRI and 11′42″ for 1.5T MRI. The interobserver analyses showed high consistency (κ = 0.771–1.000, P: 0.008 ∼ < 0.001) among 3 readers. The scores for coronal fat suppressed T2 weighted imaging (fsT2WI) and coronal T1 weighted imaging (T1WI) were significantly higher for 0.55T MRI. Most sequences at 0.55T demonstrated significantly higher SNRs (P:0.04 ∼ < 0.001). Additionally, |CNR| values for lesions were significantly higher in fs proton weighted imaging (PDWI) and fsT2WI at 0.55T. Perfect interstudy agreement between 0.55T and 1.5T was observed between 2 readers (Kappa = 1, P < 0.001) for lesion assessment. Agreement between MRI findings and arthroscopic results was perfect or good. The 0.55T system received higher scores in comfort ratings.

Conclusion

The 0.55T MRI with DL, showed comparable or better image quality in healthy subjects and patients with rotator cuff injury to 1.5T MRI without DL.

查看原文本刊更多论文

健康受试者和肩袖损伤患者肩核磁共振成像0.55T诊断图像质量：与1.5T的前瞻性比较

背景低视场0.55 T大口径MRI扫描仪可为患者提供更舒适的感觉和灵活的体位。随着深度学习重建和硬件优化的进步，0.55T大大提高了肌肉骨骼应用的图像质量和成本效益。然而，其在肩关节评估中的可行性仍未得到研究。目的评价肩袖损伤患者与志愿者肩关节0.55T MRI成像质量，并与常规1.5T进行比较。方法前瞻性纳入50例受试者（25名志愿者，25名患者）。所有参与者都接受了0.55T开放的肩部MRI，包括轮廓线圈和深度学习（DL），以及1.5T无深度学习的MRI。采用非参数方法比较图像质量分数和定量指标（信噪比（SNR）和噪声对比比（|CNR|））。已对16例患者进行了关节镜检查。Kappa统计用于评估损伤评估的观察者间和研究间的一致性。舒适感也进行了比较。结果0.55T MRI扫描时间为11′25″，1.5T MRI扫描时间为11′42″。观察者间分析显示，3位读者的结果高度一致（κ = 0.771-1.000, P: 0.008 ~ < 0.001）。0.55T MRI冠状动脉脂肪抑制T2加权成像（fsT2WI）和冠状动脉T1加权成像（T1WI）评分明显升高。大多数序列在0.55T时显示出显著更高的信噪比（P:0.04 ~ < 0.001）。此外，在质子加权成像（PDWI）和fsT2WI中，病变|CNR|值在0.55T时显著升高。两名读者在0.55T和1.5T之间观察到完美的研究间一致性（Kappa = 1, P < 0.001）。MRI检查结果与关节镜检查结果完全一致或良好。0.55T的系统在舒适度评分中得分更高。结论肩袖损伤患者和健康人的0.55T伴DL MRI图像质量与不伴DL的1.5T MRI相当或更好。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 医学-核医学

CiteScore

3.60

自引率

19.00%

发文量

331

审稿时长

3 months

期刊介绍： Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission. JACMP will publish: -Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500. -Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed. -Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references. -Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents. -Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews. -Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics. -Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic