Table 1.
Technique | Modifications |
---|---|
CT | Acquisition factors to be considered:a decrease pitch; increase peak kilovoltage; increase milliamperage per second; use large focal spot |
Reconstruction algorithms: use soft tissue filter; reconstruct thicker slices, iterative reconstruction | |
Display: use wide display window; create multiplanar three-dimensional images to reduce the display of artefact | |
MRI | 3 T is feasible, but with extensive metal artefact use 1.5 T |
Avoid parallel imaging as there is a reduction in signal-to-noise ratio | |
Pulse sequence choice: | |
Fast spin echo favoured over gradient echo (although gradient echo is not as commonly used in shoulder protocols) | |
Intermediate-weighted images are used for maximal signal-to-noise ratio, with echo times in the mid-30 s to mid-40 s | |
Fat-suppression technique choice: | |
Frequency selective fat suppression is feasible, but always compared with non-fat-suppressed images | |
Inversion recovery favoured over frequency-selective fat suppression with the presence of heavy metal; however, in many cases, fat-suppressed imaging can still be used without sacrificing detail around the rotator cuff | |
Pulse sequence parameter choices: | |
Frequency and phase direction can be swapped | |
Use longer echo train length | |
Use shorter echo time | |
Field of view, slice thickness, and matrix size altered to create small voxels (high spatial resolution) | |
Increase bandwidth | |
Increase signal averages | |
Consider contrast (MR arthrography) | |
Consider another modality: CT or ultrasound |
Other modifications to the reconstruction and display should be favoured over increasing the dose.
Modifications to acquisition parameters should be made sparingly, as these increase the radiation dose delivered to the patient.