Search

Although 7-T MRI has recently received approval for use in clinical patient care, there are distinct safety issues associated with this relatively high magnetic field. Forces on metallic implants and radiofrequency power deposition and heating are safety considerations at 7 T. Patient bioeffects such as vertigo, dizziness, false feelings of motion, nausea, nystagmus, magnetophosphenes, and electrogustatory effects are more common and potentially more pronounced at 7 T than at lower field strengths. Herein the authors review safety issues associated with 7-T MRI. The rationale for safety concerns at this field strength are discussed as well as potential approaches to mitigate risk to patients and health care professionals.

Percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is an FDA-cleared pain treatment. Occasionally, fragments of the lead (MicroLead, SPR Therapeutics, LLC, Cleveland, OH, USA) may be retained following lead removal. Since the lead is metallic, there are associated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) risks. Therefore, the objective of this investigation was to evaluate MRI-related issues (i.e., magnetic field interactions, heating, and artifacts) for various lead fragments.Testing was conducted using standardized techniques on lead fragments of different lengths (i.e., 50, 75, and 100% of maximum possible fragment length of 12.7 cm) to determine MRI-related problems. Magnetic field interactions (i.e., translational attraction and torque) and artifacts were tested for the longest lead fragment at 3 Tesla. MRI-related heating was evaluated at 1.5 Tesla/64 MHz and 3 Tesla/128 MHz with each lead fragment placed in a gelled-saline filled phantom. Temperatures were recorded on the lead fragments while using relatively high RF power levels. Artifacts were evaluated using T1-weighted, spin echo, and gradient echo (GRE) pulse sequences.The longest lead fragment produced only minor magnetic field interactions. For the lead fragments evaluated, physiologically inconsequential MRI-related heating occurred at 1.5 Tesla/64 MHz while under certain 3 Tesla/128 MHz conditions, excessive temperature elevations may occur. Artifacts extended approximately 7 mm from the lead fragment on the GRE pulse sequence, suggesting that anatomy located at a position greater than this distance may be visualized on MRI.MRI may be performed safely in patients with retained lead fragments at 1.5 Tesla using the specific conditions of this study (i.e., MR Conditional). Due to possible excessive temperature rises at 3 Tesla, performing MRI at that field strength is currently inadvisable.

The standard of care for managing a patient with an implant is to identify the item and to assess the relative safety of scanning the patient. Because the 1.5 T MR system is the most prevalent scanner in the world and 3 T is the highest field strength in widespread use, implants typically have "MR Conditional" (i.e., an item with demonstrated safety in the MR environment within defined conditions) labeling at 1.5 and/or 3 T only. This presents challenges for a facility that has a scanner operating at a field strength below 1.5 T when encountering a patient with an implant, because scanning the patient is considered "off‐label." In this case, the supervising physician is responsible for deciding whether to scan the patient based on the risks associated with the implant and the benefit of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For a passive implant, the MRI safety‐related concerns are static magnetic field interactions (i.e., force and torque) and radiofrequency (RF) field‐induced heating. The worldwide utilization of scanners operating below 1.5 T combined with the increasing incidence of patients with implants that need MRI creates circumstances that include patients potentially being subjected to unsafe imaging conditions or being denied access to MRI because physicians often lack the knowledge to perform an assessment of risk vs. benefit. Thus, physicians must have a complete understanding of the MRI‐related safety issues that impact passive implants when managing patients with these products on scanners operating below 1.5 T. This monograph provides an overview of the various clinical MR systems operating below 1.5 T and discusses the MRI‐related factors that influence safety for passive implants. Suggestions are provided for the management of patients with passive implants labeled MR Conditional at 1.5 and/or 3 T, referred to scanners operating below 1.5 T. The purpose of this information is to empower supervising physicians with the essential knowledge to perform MRI exams confidently and safely in patients with passive implants. Level of Evidence: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-related heating for a low-intensity focused ultrasound pulsation (LIFUP) device used during MRI performed at 3 T/128 MHz.Materials and methodsA special phantom was constructed to mimic the thermal properties of the human brain, and a piece of human temporal bone (skull) was embedded on top. Four fluoroptic thermometry probes, placed above and below the skull, were used to measure temperature changes during MRI (3 T/128 MHz; scanner-reported head average specific absorption rate 1.1-2 W/kg) with and without concurrent LIFUP sonication. LIFUP sonication was applied using a focused ultrasound device (BXPulsar 1001, Brainsonix, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, USA) at a derated spatial-peak temporal-average intensity of 3870 mW/cm(2) .ResultsMRI performed at relatively high specific absorption rate (SAR) caused a slight elevation in temperature (≤0.6°C). Concurrent use of MRI at a medium-strength SAR and LIFUP sonication resulted in maximum temperature rise of 3.1°C after 8 min of continuous use.ConclusionsUnder the specific conditions utilized for this investigation, LIFUP sonication does not appear to present significant heating risks when used concurrently with MRI. This information has important implications for the use of the LIFUP sonication in human subjects undergoing MRI at 3 T/128 MHz.

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-related heating for a low-intensity focused ultrasound pulsation (LIFUP) device used during MRI performed at 3 T/128 MHz.Materials and methodsA special phantom was constructed to mimic the thermal properties of the human brain, and a piece of human temporal bone (skull) was embedded on top. Four fluoroptic thermometry probes, placed above and below the skull, were used to measure temperature changes during MRI (3 T/128 MHz; scanner-reported head average specific absorption rate 1.1-2 W/kg) with and without concurrent LIFUP sonication. LIFUP sonication was applied using a focused ultrasound device (BXPulsar 1001, Brainsonix, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, USA) at a derated spatial-peak temporal-average intensity of 3870 mW/cm(2) .ResultsMRI performed at relatively high specific absorption rate (SAR) caused a slight elevation in temperature (≤0.6°C). Concurrent use of MRI at a medium-strength SAR and LIFUP sonication resulted in maximum temperature rise of 3.1°C after 8 min of continuous use.ConclusionsUnder the specific conditions utilized for this investigation, LIFUP sonication does not appear to present significant heating risks when used concurrently with MRI. This information has important implications for the use of the LIFUP sonication in human subjects undergoing MRI at 3 T/128 MHz.

Breast cancer results in up to 1.6 million new candidates for yearly breast reconstruction (BR) surgery. Two-stage breast reconstruction surgery with the use of a tissue expander (TE) is a common approach to reconstructing the breast after mastectomy. However, a common disadvantage encountered with the traditional breast TE is the magnetic injection port, which has been reported to cause injuries in patients undergoing magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. Therefore this type of breast TE is labeled "MR unsafe." Recent technological advances have incorporated radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology in the TE to allow for the location of the injection port without magnetic components, resulting in an MR-conditional TE. This paper aims to review the information regarding the safety profile of TEs with magnetic ports and to gather distinct clinical scenarios in which an MR-conditional TE benefits the patient during the BR process. A literature review ranging from 2018 to 2022 was performed with the search terms: "tissue expander" OR "breast tissue expander" AND "magnetic resonance imaging" OR "MRI." Additionally, a case series was collected from each of the authors' practices. The literature search yielded 13 recent peer-reviewed papers, and 6 distinct clinical scenarios were compiled and discussed. Most clinicians find MRI examinations to be the state-of-art diagnostic imaging modality. However, due to the preexisting risks associated with TEs with magnetic ports, the MRI labeling classification should be considered when deciding which TE is the most appropriate for the patient requiring MRI examinations. Level of Evidence: 4 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2005.04.015 Byline: Frank G. Shellock (a), David S. Fieno (b), Louise J. Thomson (a)(b), Thomas M. Talavage (c), Daniel S. Berman (b) Abstract: In vitro testing is used to determine safe parameters before performing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on a patient with an implant. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate a cardiac pacemaker using a 1.5-T magnetic resonance (MR) system. Author Affiliation: (a) Departments of Radiology and Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, and Institute for Magnetic Resonance Safety, Education, and Research, Los Angeles, CA (b) Department of Imaging, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA (c) School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN Article History: Received 26 December 2004; Accepted 7 April 2005