MR imaging versus alternative imaging techniques.

Abstract

MR imaging is the method of choice in evaluating a large number of soft-tissue abnormalities; however, it has certain draw-backs, some of which may make other imaging methods more suitable. MR imaging is more expensive than alternative imaging methods; it may not be affordable for screening purposes and for diagnoses obtainable by less expensive imaging methods. In addition, immediate scheduling is not always possible for MR imaging, and an MR scanner may not be available close to the patient's home, which may be important for imaging follow-up. These factors support the use of other imaging modalities, with sonography frequently being the appropriate choice. In some situations, mainly in the presence of certain biomedical implants and devices, MR imaging is contraindicated. Additionally, under some circumstances patient access may be difficult during MR imaging; sonography and CT therefore are preferable (as for imaging guided biopsy). Moreover, some artifacts, such as motion artifacts, may have less relevance in other imaging methods (such as sonography), which may be important in noncooperative patients and children. MR imaging may not be specific in tumors and infection; this deficiency is shared with most alternative imaging methods, with the exception of scintigraphy in selected indications. Lastly, standard radiography and CT commonly are superior to MR imaging in diagnosing calcification and abnormalities of cortical bone. Consequently, in selected cases and for screening purposes, methods other than MR imaging should be considered for depicting soft-tissue structures.