Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 48, Issue 8, pp 1101–1107 | Cite as

Current utilization and procedural practices in pediatric whole-body MRI

  • Gary R. SchoolerEmail author
  • Joseph T. Davis
  • Heike E. Daldrup-Link
  • Donald P. Frush
Original Article



Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an evolving and increasingly powerful imaging tool with a variety of applications in the pediatric patient population. Variability exists among radiology practices in how this MRI tool is used and how it is performed.


Our objective was to gain an improved understanding of technical and utilization practices in pediatric whole-body MRI across North America by exploring indications for exam performance, determining referral patterns, and assessing technical protocols and procedures.

Materials and methods

A 19-question survey was generated in Survey Monkey and distributed in 2016 to the Society for Pediatric Radiology membership. The survey asked questions that included practice type, imaging modality preferences for diseases commonly evaluated with whole-body MRI, MRI field strength and sequence selection, and billing practices.


Data were obtained from 62 unique responses to the survey, representing 471 physicians. The majority (93%) practice in an academic institution or private practice with academic affiliation and most practices have utilized whole-body MRI for less than 6 years. Whole-body MRI is performed in pediatric patients 0 to 18 years of age, and was the preferred imaging modality for diagnosis/staging/follow-up in neurofibromatosis, type 1 (75%), chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis (CRMO) (74%), cancer predisposition syndromes (75%), vasculopathies (50%) and disseminated/multifocal infection (49%). The most commonly utilized sequences are coronal short tau inversion recovery (STIR) (90%), coronal T1 with or without fat saturation (65%), and axial diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) (48%). No preference was shown for either 1.5-T or 3-T systems. Wide variability was seen in preference for billing code utilization, though the majority use chest/abdomen/pelvis (57%) or unlisted MRI (37%) codes.


Radiology practitioners – represented by the Society for Pediatric Radiology pediatric radiologists – are using whole-body MRI in the imaging care of pediatric patients for a variety of indications. Survey results reveal some variability in exam utilization and technical performance practices among those pediatric radiologists who perform whole-body MRI.


Children Magnetic resonance imaging Pediatric radiology Survey Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest


Supplementary material

247_2018_4145_MOESM1_ESM.docx (23 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 22 kb)


  1. 1.
    Davis JT, Kwatra N, Schooler GR (2016) Pediatric whole-body MRI: a review of current imaging techniques and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 44:783–793CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eutsler EP, Khanna G (2016) Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in children: technique and clinical applications. Pediatr Radiol 46:858–872CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yoon HM, Kim JR, Jung AY et al (2017) Whole body MR imaging: a useful imaging modality in the management of children with acute myeloid leukemia. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 17:231–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Krohmer S, Sorge I, Krausse A et al (2010) Whole-body MRI for primary evaluation of malignant disease in children. Eur J Radiol 74:256–261CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bueno MT, Martinez-Ríos C, la Puente GA et al (2017) Pediatric imaging in DICER1 syndrome. Pediatr Radiol 47:1292–1301CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ballinger ML, Best A, Mai PL et al (2017) Baseline surveillance in Li-Fraumeni syndrome using whole-body magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol 3:1634–1639CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goo HW, Yang DH, Ra YS et al (2006) Whole-body MRI of Langerhans cell histiocytosis: comparison with radiography and bone scintigraphy. Pediatr Radiol 36:1019–1031CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ahlawat S, Fayad LM, Khan MS et al (2016) Current whole-body MRI applications in the neurofibromatosis: NF1, NF2, and schwannomatosis. Neurology 87(Suppl 1):S31–S39CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Arnoldi AP, Schlett CL, Douis H et al (2017) Whole-body MRI in patients with non-bacterial osteitis: radiological findings and correlation with clinical data. Eur Radiol 27:2391–2399CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aquino MR, Tse SML, Gupta S et al (2015) Whole-body MRI of juvenile spondyloarthritis: protocols and pictorial review of characteristic patterns. Pediatr Radiol 45:754–762CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hu D, Flick RP, Zaccariello MJ et al (2017) Association between exposure of young children to procedures requiring general anesthesia and learning and behavioral outcomes in a population-based birth cohort. Anesthesiology 127:227–240CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aghighi M, Pisani LJ, Sun Z et al (2016) Speeding up PET/MR for cancer staging of children and young adults. Eur Radiol 26:4239–4248CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mohan S, Moineddin R, Chavhan GB (2015) Pediatric whole-body magnetic resonance imaging: intra-individual comparison of technical quality, artifacts, and fixed structure visibility at 1.5 and 3 T. Indian J Radiol Imaging 25:353–358CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kellenberger CJ, Epelman M, Miller SF, Babyn PS (2004) Fast STIR whole-body MR imaging in children. Radiographics 24:1317–1330CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Raissaki M, Demetriou S, Spanakis K et al (2017) Multifocal bone and bone marrow lesions in children – MRI findings. Pediatr Radiol 47:342–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chavhan GB, Caro-Dominguez P (2016) Diffusion-weighted imaging in pediatric body magnetic resonance imaging. Pediatr Radiol 46:847–857CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Atkin KL, Ditchfield MR (2014) The role of whole-body MRI in pediatric oncology. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 36:342–352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McDonald JS, McDonald RJ, Jentoft ME et al (2017) Intracranial gadolinium deposition following gadodiamide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric patients: a case-control study. JAMA Pediatr 171:705–707CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tibussek D, Rademacher C, Caspers J et al (2017) Gadolinium brain deposition after macrocyclic gadolinium administration: a pediatric case-control study. Radiology 285:223–230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Daldrup-Link HE (2017) Ten things you might not know about iron oxide nanoparticles. Radiology 284:616–629CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mithal LB, Patel PS, Mithal D et al (2017) Use of gadolinium-based magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents and awareness of brain gadolinium deposition among pediatric providers in North America. Pediatr Radiol 47:657–664CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liszewski MC, Görkem S, Sodhi KS, Lee EY (2017) Lung magnetic resonance imaging for pneumonia in children. Pediatr Radiol 47:1420–1430CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyDuke University Medical Center, 1905 McGovern-Davison Children’s Health CenterDurhamUSA
  2. 2.Department of Radiology, Lucile Packard Children’s HospitalStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations