Baseline MRI examination in the NAKO Health Study—findings on feasibility, participation and dropout rates, comfort, and image quality

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) yields important information on the development and current status of many different diseases. Whole-body MRI was accordingly made a part of the multicenter, population-based NAKO Health Study. The present analysis concerns the feasibility of the baseline MRI examination and various aspects of quality assurance over the period 2014-2019. METHODS: 32 252 participants in the NAKO Health Study, aged 20 to 74, who had no contraindication to MRI were invited to undergo scanning in one of five MRI study centers across Germany. The whole-body MRI scan took about one hour and consisted of sequences for the visualization of structural and functional features of the brain, musculoskeletal system, cardiovascular system, and thoracoabdominal system. A comprehensive quality-assurance assessment was carried out, with evaluation of adverse events, the completeness of the MRI protocols, the participants' subjective perceptions, and image quality. RESULTS: 31 578 participants (97.9%) were successfully included in the MRI study. They reported a high level of comfort and suffered no severe adverse events (mild adverse events occurred in only four participants). Depending on the imaging sequence, the image quality was rated as excellent in 80.2% to 96.8% of cases. Quality assessment with respect to structural features of the brain revealed high consistency across study centers, as well as with regard to age- and sex-based differences in brain volume (men, 1203.81 ± 102.06 cm³; women, 1068.10 ± 86.69 cm³). CONCLUSION: Whole-body MRI was successfully implemented in the NAKO baseline examination and was associated with high patient comfort and very good image quality. The imaging biomarkers of the brain confirmed previously observed differences based on age and sex, underscoring the feasibility of data pooling.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.