Advertisement

Magnetic Particle Imaging: Artifact-Free Metallic Stent Lumen Imaging in a Phantom Study

  • 106 Accesses

Abstract

Purpose

To illustrate the potential of magnetic particle imaging (MPI) for stent lumen imaging in comparison with clinical computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Materials and Methods

Imaging of eight tracer-filled, stented vessel phantoms and a tracer-filled, non-stented reference phantom for each diameter was performed on a preclinical MPI scanner: eight commercially available coronary stents of different dimensions (diameter: 3–4 mm; length: 11–38 mm) and materials (stainless steel, platinum–chromium) were implanted into silicone vessel phantoms. For comparison, all vessel phantoms were also visualized by MRI and CT. Two radiologists assessed the images regarding stent-induced artifacts using a 5-point grading scale.

Results

The visualization of all stented vessel phantoms was achieved without stent-induced artifacts with MPI. In contrast, MRI and CT images revealed multiform stent-induced artifacts.

Conclusion

Given its clinical introduction, MPI has the potential to overcome the disadvantages of MRI and CT concerning the visualization of the stent lumen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. 1.

    Gleich B, Weizenecker J. Tomographic imaging using the nonlinear response of magnetic particles. Nature. 2005;435:1214–7.

  2. 2.

    Saritas EU, Goodwill PW, Croft LR, et al. Magnetic particle imaging (MPI) for NMR and MRI researchers. J Magn Reson. 2013;229:116–26.

  3. 3.

    Weizenecker J, Gleich B, Rahmer J, et al. Three-dimensional real-time in vivo magnetic particle imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54:L1–10.

  4. 4.

    Haegele J, Rahmer J, Gleich B, et al. Magnetic particle imaging: visualization of instruments for cardiovascular intervention. Radiology. 2012;265:933–8.

  5. 5.

    Duschka RL, Wojtczyk H, Panagiotopoulos N, et al. Safety measurements for heating of instruments for cardiovascular interventions in magnetic particle imaging (MPI)—first experiences. J Healthc Eng. 2014;5:79–93.

  6. 6.

    Salamon J, Hofmann M, Jung C, et al. Magnetic particle/magnetic resonance imaging: in vitro MPI-guided real time catheter tracking and 4D angioplasty using a road map and blood pool tracer approach. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0156899.

  7. 7.

    Herz S, Vogel P, Dietrich P, et al. Magnetic particle imaging guided real-time percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in a phantom model. Cardiovasc Inter Radiol. 2018;41:1100–5.

  8. 8.

    Vaalma S, Rahmer J, Panagiotopoulos N, et al. Magnetic particle imaging (MPI): experimental quantification of vascular stenosis using stationary stenosis phantoms. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:e0168902.

  9. 9.

    Herz S, Vogel P, Kampf T, et al. Magnetic particle imaging for quantification of vascular stenoses: a phantom study. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2017;37:61–7.

  10. 10.

    Wegner F, Friedrich T, Panagiotopoulos N, et al. First heating measurements of endovascular stents in magnetic particle imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2018;63:045005.

  11. 11.

    Herz S, Vogel P, Kampf T, et al. Magnetic particle imaging guided stenting. J Endovasc Ther. 2019;26:512–9.

  12. 12.

    Moses JW, Leon MB, Popma JJ, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1315–23.

  13. 13.

    Maintz D, Juergens K-U, Wichter T, et al. Imaging of coronary artery stents using multislice computed tomography: in vitro evaluation. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:830–5.

  14. 14.

    Klemm T, Duda S, Machann J, et al. MR imaging in the presence of vascular stents: a systematic assessment of artifacts for various stent orientations, sequence types, and field strengths. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;12:606–15.

  15. 15.

    Lettau M, Bendszus M, Hähnel S. Angiographic CT: in vitro comparison of different carotid artery stents using two different angiography systems. J Neuroradiol. 2013;40:348–54.

  16. 16.

    Frölich AMJ, Pilgram-Pastor SM, Psychogios MN, et al. Comparing different MR angiography strategies of carotid stents in a vascular flow model: toward stent-specific recommendations in MR follow-up. Neuroradiology. 2010;53:359–65.

  17. 17.

    von Gladiss A, Graeser M, Szwargulski P, et al. Hybrid system calibration for multidimensional magnetic particle imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2017;62:3392–406.

  18. 18.

    Kaczmarz S. Angenäherte auflösung von systemen linearer gleichungen. Bull Int Acad Pol Sci Lett Cl Sci Math Nat Ser A. 1937;35:355–7.

  19. 19.

    Haegele J, Cremers S, Rahmer J, et al. Magnetic particle imaging: a resovist based marking technology for guide wires and catheters for vascular interventions. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2016;35:2312–8.

  20. 20.

    Haegele J, Vaalma S, Panagiotopoulos N, et al. Multi-color magnetic particle imaging for cardiovascular interventions. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61:N415–26.

  21. 21.

    Sun Z, Almutairi AMD. Diagnostic accuracy of 64 multislice CT angiography in the assessment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2010;73:266–73.

  22. 22.

    Lettau M, Sauer A, Heiland S, et al. Carotid artery stents: in vitro comparison of different stent designs and sizes using CT angiography and contrast-enhanced MR angiography at 1.5 T and 3 T. Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30:1993–7.

  23. 23.

    Hoffmann R, Mintz GS, Dussaillant GR, et al. Patterns and mechanisms of in-stent restenosis: a serial intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation. 1996;94:1247–54.

  24. 24.

    Ñato M, Gomez-Lara J, Romaguera R, et al. One-year optical coherence tomography findings in patients with late and very-late stent thrombosis treated with intravascular imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;34:1511–20.

  25. 25.

    Graeser M, Thieben F, Szwargulski P, et al. Human-sized magnetic particle imaging for brain applications. Nat Commun. 2018;10:1936.

  26. 26.

    Saritas EU, Goodwill PW, Zhang GZ, Conolly SM. Magnetostimulation limits in magnetic particle imaging. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2013;32:1600–10.

  27. 27.

    Franke J, Heinen U, Lehr H, et al. System characterization of a highly integrated preclinical hybrid MPI–MRI scanner. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2016;35:1993–2004.

  28. 28.

    Vogel P, Lother S, Rückert MA, et al. MRI meets MPI: a bimodal MPI–MRI tomograph. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2014;33:1954–9.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Ankit Malhotra (Institute of Medical Engineering, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany) for assisting with the phantoms and Armin Herzog (Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig–Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany) for technical support regarding the CT image acquisition.

Funding

This study partially was funded by Federal Ministry of Education and Research BMBF Grant Nos. 13GW0071D, 13GW0069A, 13GW0230B, and 01DL17010A.

Author information

Correspondence to Franz Wegner.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

For this type of study, informed consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wegner, F., Friedrich, T., von Gladiss, A. et al. Magnetic Particle Imaging: Artifact-Free Metallic Stent Lumen Imaging in a Phantom Study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 43, 331–338 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-019-02347-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Magnetic particle imaging
  • Stents
  • Artifacts
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • Computed tomography