Metal artifact suppression at the hip: diagnostic performance at 3.0 T versus 1.5 Tesla

PurposeThis work aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of a metal artifact suppression sequence (MAVRIC-SL) for imaging of hip arthroplasties (HA) at 1.5 and 3 Tesla (T) field strength.MethodsEighteen patients (10 females; aged 27-74) with HA were examined at 3.0 and 1.5 T within 3 weeks. The sequence protocol included 3D-MAVRIC-SL PD (coronal), 3D-MAVRIC-SL STIR (axial), FSE T1, FSE PD and STIR sequences. Anatomical structures and pathological findings were assessed independently by two radiologists. Artifact extent and technical quality (image quality, fat saturation and geometric distortion) were also evaluated. Findings at 1.5 and 3.0 T were compared using a Wilcoxon signed rank test.ResultsWhile image quality was better at 1.5 T, visualization of anatomic structures and clinical abnormalities was not significantly different using the two field strengths (p > 0.05). Fat suppression and amount of artifacts were significantly better at 1.5 T (p  < 0.01). Inter- and intra-reader agreement for different anatomic details, image quality and visualization of abnormalities ranged from k = 0.62 to k = 1.00.ConclusionMAVRIC-SL at 1.5 T had a comparable diagnostic performance when compared MAVRIC-SL at 3.0 T; however, the higher field strength was associated with larger artifacts, limited image quality and worse fat saturation

Climate change goes underground: effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 on microbial community structure and activities in the rhizosphere.

General concern about climate change has led to growing interest in the responses of terrestrial ecosystems to elevated concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere. Experimentation during the last two to three decades using a large variety of approaches has provided sufficient information to conclude that enrichment of atmospheric CO2 may have severe impact on terrestrial ecosystems. This impact is mainly due to the changes in the organic C dynamics as a result of the effects of elevated CO2 on the primary source of organic C in soil, i.e., plant photosynthesis. As the majority of life in soil is heterotrophic and dependent on the input of plant-derived organic C, the activity and functioning of soil organisms will greatly be influenced by changes in the atmospheric CO2 concentration. In this review, we examine the current state of the art with respect to effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 on soil microbial communities, with a focus on microbial community structure. On the basis of the existing information, we conclude that the main effects of elevated atmospheric CO2 on soil microbiota occur via plant metabolism and root secretion, especially in C3 plants, thereby directly affecting the mycorrhizal, bacterial, and fungal communities in the close vicinity of the root. There is little or no direct effect on the microbial community of the bulk soil. In particular, we have explored the impact of these changes on rhizosphere interactions and ecosystem processes, including food web interactions

Swedish national survey on MR safety compared with CT : a false sense of security?

Objectives: The objectives were to survey MR safety incidents in Sweden during a 12-month period, to assess severity scores, and to evaluate the confidence of MR personnel in incident-reporting mechanisms. Method: Data were collected within a web-based questionnaire on safety in clinical MR environments with CT for comparison. Data reported MR and CT safety incidents (human injury, material damage, and close calls), incident severity, and confidence of participants in incident-reporting systems. Results: The study population consisted of 529 eligible participants. Participants reported 200 MR and 156 CT safety incidents. Among MR incidents, 16% were given the highest potential severity score. More MR workers (73%) than CT workers (50%) were confident in being aware of any incident occurring at their workplace. However, 69% MR workers (83% for CT) were not aware of reported incidents at their hospitals. Conclusion: Safety incidents resulting in human injury, material damage, and close calls in clinical MR environments do occur. According to national risk assessment recommendations, risk level is high. Results indicated that MR personnel tend to a false sense of security, as a high proportion of staff members were sure that they would have been aware of any incident occurring in their own department, while in reality, incidents did occur without their knowledge. We conclude that false sense of security exists for MR. Key Points: • Safety incidents in clinical MR environments still result in human injury and material damage. • Severity level of MR incidents—assessed using Swedish national risk assessment recommendations—is high. • Confidence of MR personnel in incident-reporting mechanisms is high, but reflects a false sense of security, as a high proportion of staff is unaware of reported incidents in the same workplace

MR-safety in clinical practice at 7T : Evaluation of a multistep screening process in 1819 subjects

Introduction: MR facilities must implement and maintain adequate screening and safety procedures to ensure safety during MR examinations. The aim of this study was to evaluate a multi-step MR safety screening process used at a 7T facility regarding incidence of different types of safety risks detected during the safety procedure. Methods: Subjects scheduled for an MR examination and having entered the 7T facility during 2016–2019 underwent a pre-defined multi-step MR safety screening process. Screening documentation of 1819 included subjects was reviewed, and risks identified during the different screening steps were compiled. These data were also related to documented decisions made by a 7T MR safety committee and reported MR safety incidents. Results: Passive or active implants (n = 315) were identified in a screening form and/or an additional documented interview in 305 subjects. Additional information not previously self-reported by the subject, regarding implants necessitating safety decisions performed by the staff was revealed in the documented interview in 102 subjects (106 items). In total, the 7T MR safety committee documented a decision in 36 (2%) of the included subjects. All of these subjects were finally cleared for scanning. Conclusion: A multi-step screening process allows a thorough MR screening of subjects, avoiding safety incidents. Different steps in the process allow awareness to rise and items to be detected that were missed in earlier steps. Implications for practice: Safety questions posed at a single timepoint during an MR screening process might not reveal all safety risks. Repetition and rephrasing of screening questions leads to increased detection of safety risks. This could be effectively mitigated by a multi-step screening process. A multi-disciplinary safety committee is efficient at short notice responding to unexpected safety issues