SAEVA Proceedings 2014 | Page 157

46TH  ANNUAL  CONGRESS  OF  THE  SAEVA        SKUKUZA      16-­‐20  FEBRUARY  2014   157     magnetic field variation). T2 weighted sequences are good for demonstrating fluid in tissue and hence give good information about pathology within the region being studied. STIR sequences suppress the signal coming from fat, which allows the differentiation of fluid (such as oedema) from fat. This is particularly important when evaluating bone, and STIRs help to differentiate between normal fat within the bone and pathologic fluid/oedema. The time to complete a STIR sequence is prolonged relative to the T1 and T2 weighted sequences, and this can result in motion artifact in the standing animal. STIRS are not very good at looking at anatomic detail for this reason. The strength of a magnetic field is measured in Teslas; the higher the Tesla, the faster the acquisition of an image, the better the image quality, and the more expensive the equipment. Most MR units used in veterinary medicine have a Tesla range between 0.2 and 1.5T. There are two main types of magnets. Closed magnets generally have a relatively large magnet (1T or more), use a gantry, and require general anaesthesia to acquire the images. The size of the gantry is a limiting factor, and in adult horses imaging is usually confined to the carpus/hock and distal, and the head and cranial neck. In many foals, imaging can also be performed on the caudal vertebrae, thorax and abdomen. There are also open units available, such as the Hallmarq system. These magnets generally have a lower strength, in the magnitude of 0.3T.1, 2 The MRI unit I have experience within Australia (located at the University Veterinary Teaching Hospital Camden (UVTHC) is a Hallmarq system. One of the principle advantages of this system is it allows imaging of the standing horse under sedation, negating the need for general anaesthesia. Another advantage is a significant lower purchase price and lower maintenance costs. There are some disadvantages to this system, however. Image quality is not as good if compared to a closed, high Tesla magnet. Motion artifact can be a problem, especially with an uncooperative patient or imaging above the pastern region. Recent upgrades to motion correction software have made this less of an issue. Motion artifact is intensified as you move up the leg, and in general it is more difficult to obtain good quality images of the carpus or hock than the foot, for example. The coil size available for the Hallmarq system limits the MR examination in the adult horse to the carpus/hock and distal. In addition, precise localization of the lesion to a specific region is important to limit acquisition of MR images to a specific area, thus keeping the time required for imaging reasonable. Interpretation of MR images is much more complicated than interpreting radiographs or ultrasound. Different imaging sequences are used to help evaluate normal structure and to document pathology. Further techniques can be used to help determine whether the pathology is acute or chronic. This can complicate interpretation, as structures such as tendons, synovial fluid and bone can appear different depending on the sequence (contrast technique) run. In addition, there are a complex array of “artifacts” that can be produced on MR images, including those produced by recent diagnostic anaesthesia.3 In my opinion, having an imaging specialist review these images is essential to get the most information from the study. There are many indications for MR imaging in horses. MRI should be considered in   157