Whitney D Tope1, Frank G Shellock. 1. Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota Hospital and Clinic, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To use a survey to determine the incidence of complications and adverse events in individuals with permanent cosmetics (e.g., tattooed eyeliner, eyebrows, lips, cheeks, etc.) who underwent magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to clients of cosmetic tattoo technicians. This survey asked study subjects for demographic data, information about their tattoos, and for their experiences during MR imaging procedures. RESULTS: Data obtained from 1032 surveys were tabulated. One hundred thirty-five (13.1%) study subjects underwent MR imaging after having permanent cosmetics applied. Of these, only two individuals (1.5%) experienced problems associated with MR imaging. One subject reported a sensation of "slight tingling" and the other subject reported a sensation of "burning"; both sensations were transient in nature. CONCLUSION: Based on these findings and information in the peer-reviewed literature, it appears that MR imaging may be performed in patients with permanent cosmetics without any serious soft tissue reactions or adverse events. Therefore, the presence of permanent cosmetics should not prevent a patient from undergoing MR imaging. Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PURPOSE: To use a survey to determine the incidence of complications and adverse events in individuals with permanent cosmetics (e.g., tattooed eyeliner, eyebrows, lips, cheeks, etc.) who underwent magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to clients of cosmetic tattoo technicians. This survey asked study subjects for demographic data, information about their tattoos, and for their experiences during MR imaging procedures. RESULTS: Data obtained from 1032 surveys were tabulated. One hundred thirty-five (13.1%) study subjects underwent MR imaging after having permanent cosmetics applied. Of these, only two individuals (1.5%) experienced problems associated with MR imaging. One subject reported a sensation of "slight tingling" and the other subject reported a sensation of "burning"; both sensations were transient in nature. CONCLUSION: Based on these findings and information in the peer-reviewed literature, it appears that MR imaging may be performed in patients with permanent cosmetics without any serious soft tissue reactions or adverse events. Therefore, the presence of permanent cosmetics should not prevent a patient from undergoing MR imaging. Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Yacine Noureddine; Andreas K Bitz; Mark E Ladd; Markus Thürling; Susanne C Ladd; Gregor Schaefers; Oliver Kraff Journal: MAGMA Date: 2015-09-26 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Shawn M McClintock; Irving M Reti; Linda L Carpenter; William M McDonald; Marc Dubin; Stephan F Taylor; Ian A Cook; John O'Reardon; Mustafa M Husain; Christopher Wall; Andrew D Krystal; Shirlene M Sampson; Oscar Morales; Brent G Nelson; Vassilios Latoussakis; Mark S George; Sarah H Lisanby Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2018 Jan/Feb Impact factor: 4.384