Clinical Value and Operational Risks of MRI in ICU patients – A Retrospective Analysis Performed at a University Medical Center

Abstract

Purpose Intensive care unit (ICU) patients have a high risk of developing complications when leaving the ICU for diagnostic procedures or therapeutic interventions. Our study examined the frequency of adverse events associated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of intensive care patients and the extent of changes in therapy due to the MRI scan to weigh the risks associated with the scan against the potential benefits of an MR scan, using a change in therapy as an indicator of benefit. Materials and Methods 4434 ICU patients (January to December 2015) were identified by Hospital Information System (SAP-R/3 IS-H, Walldorf, Germany), ICU patient data management system Metavision (iMDsoft, Israel), and Radiology Information System (Nexus.medRIS, Version 8.42, Nexus, Germany). All intensive care and medical records (HIS) and MRI reports (RIS) were matched and further evaluated in a retrospective case-to-case analysis for biometric data, mechanical ventilation, ICU requirements, planned postoperative vs. emergency diagnostic requirements, complications and impact on further diagnosis or therapy. Results Out of 4434 ICU patients, 322 ICU patients (7.3 %) underwent a total of 385 MRI examinations. 167 patients needed a total of 215 emergency scans, while 155 patients underwent 170 planned postoperative MRI exams. 158 (94.6 %) out of 167 emergency scan patients were ventilated under continuous intravenous medication and monitoring. In the planned postoperative group, only 6 (3.9 %) out of 155 were ventilated, but a total of 38 (24.5 %) were under continuous medication. 111 patients were accompanied by nurses only during MRI. Only one severe adverse event (0.3 %) was noted and was attributed to study preparation (n = 385). In 8 MRI examinations (2.1 %), the examination was interrupted or cancelled due to the patients’ condition. While all MRI examinations in the planned group were completed (n = 170, 100 %) (e. g., postoperative controls), only 207 out of 215 (96.3 %) could be performed for emergency diagnostic reasons. MRI influenced the clinical course with a change in diagnosis or therapy in 74 (19.2 %) of all 385 MRI examinations performed, and in the emergency diagnostic group it was 31.2 % (n = 67/215). Conclusion Nearly 20 % of MRI examinations of ICU patients resulted in a change of therapy. With only one potentially life-threatening adverse event (0.3 %) during transport and the MRI examination, the risk seems to be outweighed by the diagnostic benefit. Key Points: