Objectives: Low-field MRI at 0.55 Tesla (T) with deep learning image reconstruction has recently become commercially available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the image quality and diagnostic reliability of knee MRI performed at 0.55T compared with 1.5T.
Methods: A total of 20 volunteers (9 female, 11 male; mean age = 42 years) underwent knee MRI on a 0.55T system (MAGNETOM Free.Max, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany; 12-channel Contour M Coil) and a 1.5T scanner (MAGNETOM Sola, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany; 18-channel transmit/receive knee coil). Standard two-dimensional (2D) turbo spin echo (TSE), fat-suppressed (fs) proton density-weighted (PDw), T1w TSE, and T2w TSE sequences were acquired in approximately 15 min. In total, 2 radiologists blinded to the field strength subjectively assessed all MRI sequences (overall image quality, image noise, and diagnostic quality) using a 5-point Likert scale (1-5; 5 = best). Additionally, both radiologists evaluated the possible pathologies of menisci, ligaments, and cartilage. Contrast ratios (CRs) of different tissues (bone, cartilage, and menisci) were determined on coronal PDw fs TSE images. The statistical analysis included Cohen's kappa and the Wilcoxon rank sum test.
Results: The overall image quality of the 0.55T T2w, T1w, and PDw fs TSE sequences was diagnostic and rated similar for T1w (p > 0.05), but lower for PDw fs TSE and T2w TSE compared with 1.5T (p < 0.05). The diagnostic accordance of meniscal and cartilage pathologies at 0.55T was similar to 1.5T. The CRs of the tissues were not significantly different between 1.5T and 0.55T (p > 0.05). The inter-observer agreement of the subjective image quality was generally fair between both readers and almost perfect for the pathologies.
Conclusions: Deep learning-reconstructed TSE imaging at 0.55T yielded diagnostic image quality for knee MRI compared with standard 1.5T MRI. The diagnostic performance of meniscal and cartilage pathologies was equal for 0.55T and 1.5T without a significant loss of diagnostic information.
Keywords: deep learning reconstruction; diagnostic imaging; knee; low-field MRI; magnetic resonance imaging.