Anna Zsófia Szinyei, Bastian Maus, Jonas Q Schmid, Matthias Klimek, Daniel Segelcke, Esther M Pogatzki-Zahn, Bruno Pradier, Cornelius Faber
{"title":"系统评估多模态脑功能磁共振成像中用于植入物固定的粘合剂。","authors":"Anna Zsófia Szinyei, Bastian Maus, Jonas Q Schmid, Matthias Klimek, Daniel Segelcke, Esther M Pogatzki-Zahn, Bruno Pradier, Cornelius Faber","doi":"10.1007/s10334-024-01220-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Invasive multimodal fMRI in rodents is often compromised by susceptibility artifacts from adhesives used to secure cranial implants. We hypothesized that adhesive type, shape, and field strength significantly affect susceptibility artifacts, and systematically evaluated various adhesives.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty-one adhesives were applied in constrained/unconstrained geometries and imaged with T2*-weighted EPI at 7.0 and 9.4 T to assess artifact depths. Spherical and flat patch shapes, both unconstrained geometries, were compared for artifact depth in vitro and in vivo. Adhesion strength was assessed on post-mortem mouse crania. Finally, an integrative scoring system rated adhesive properties, including artifact depth, handling, and adhesion strength.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Susceptibility artifacts were two times larger at 9.4 than at 7.0 T (p < 0.001), strongest at the patch edges, and deeper with spherical than flat patches (p < 0.05). Artifact size depended more on shape and volume after curing than adhesive type. Our integrative scoring system showed resins, bonding agents, and acrylics offered the best overall properties, while silicones and cements were less favorable.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Adhesive selection requires balancing handling, curing time, strength, and artifact depth. To minimize artifacts, adhesives should be applied in a spread-out, flat and thin layer. Our integrative scoring system supports classification of future classes of adhesives.</p>","PeriodicalId":18067,"journal":{"name":"Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematic evaluation of adhesives for implant fixation in multimodal functional brain MRI.\",\"authors\":\"Anna Zsófia Szinyei, Bastian Maus, Jonas Q Schmid, Matthias Klimek, Daniel Segelcke, Esther M Pogatzki-Zahn, Bruno Pradier, Cornelius Faber\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10334-024-01220-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Invasive multimodal fMRI in rodents is often compromised by susceptibility artifacts from adhesives used to secure cranial implants. We hypothesized that adhesive type, shape, and field strength significantly affect susceptibility artifacts, and systematically evaluated various adhesives.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty-one adhesives were applied in constrained/unconstrained geometries and imaged with T2*-weighted EPI at 7.0 and 9.4 T to assess artifact depths. Spherical and flat patch shapes, both unconstrained geometries, were compared for artifact depth in vitro and in vivo. Adhesion strength was assessed on post-mortem mouse crania. Finally, an integrative scoring system rated adhesive properties, including artifact depth, handling, and adhesion strength.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Susceptibility artifacts were two times larger at 9.4 than at 7.0 T (p < 0.001), strongest at the patch edges, and deeper with spherical than flat patches (p < 0.05). Artifact size depended more on shape and volume after curing than adhesive type. Our integrative scoring system showed resins, bonding agents, and acrylics offered the best overall properties, while silicones and cements were less favorable.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Adhesive selection requires balancing handling, curing time, strength, and artifact depth. To minimize artifacts, adhesives should be applied in a spread-out, flat and thin layer. Our integrative scoring system supports classification of future classes of adhesives.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-024-01220-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-024-01220-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Systematic evaluation of adhesives for implant fixation in multimodal functional brain MRI.
Objective: Invasive multimodal fMRI in rodents is often compromised by susceptibility artifacts from adhesives used to secure cranial implants. We hypothesized that adhesive type, shape, and field strength significantly affect susceptibility artifacts, and systematically evaluated various adhesives.
Materials and methods: Thirty-one adhesives were applied in constrained/unconstrained geometries and imaged with T2*-weighted EPI at 7.0 and 9.4 T to assess artifact depths. Spherical and flat patch shapes, both unconstrained geometries, were compared for artifact depth in vitro and in vivo. Adhesion strength was assessed on post-mortem mouse crania. Finally, an integrative scoring system rated adhesive properties, including artifact depth, handling, and adhesion strength.
Results: Susceptibility artifacts were two times larger at 9.4 than at 7.0 T (p < 0.001), strongest at the patch edges, and deeper with spherical than flat patches (p < 0.05). Artifact size depended more on shape and volume after curing than adhesive type. Our integrative scoring system showed resins, bonding agents, and acrylics offered the best overall properties, while silicones and cements were less favorable.
Discussion: Adhesive selection requires balancing handling, curing time, strength, and artifact depth. To minimize artifacts, adhesives should be applied in a spread-out, flat and thin layer. Our integrative scoring system supports classification of future classes of adhesives.
期刊介绍:
MAGMA is a multidisciplinary international journal devoted to the publication of articles on all aspects of magnetic resonance techniques and their applications in medicine and biology. MAGMA currently publishes research papers, reviews, letters to the editor, and commentaries, six times a year. The subject areas covered by MAGMA include:
advances in materials, hardware and software in magnetic resonance technology,
new developments and results in research and practical applications of magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy related to biology and medicine,
study of animal models and intact cells using magnetic resonance,
reports of clinical trials on humans and clinical validation of magnetic resonance protocols.