BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent work has shown a potential for excessive heating of deep brain stimulation electrodes during MR imaging. This in vitro study investigates the relationship between electrode heating and the specific absorption rate (SAR) of several MR images. METHODS: In vitro testing was performed by using a 1.5-T MR imaging system and a head transmit-receive coil, with bilateral deep brain stimulation systems positioned in a gel saline-filled phantom, and temperature monitoring with a fluoroptic thermometry system. Standardized fast spin-echo sequences were performed over a range of high, medium, and low SAR values. Several additional, clinically important MR imaging techniques, including 3D magnetization prepared rapid acquisition gradient-echo imaging, echo-planar imaging, quantitative magnetization transfer imaging, and magnetization transfer-suppressed MR angiography, were also tested by using typical parameters. RESULTS: A significant, highly linear relationship between SAR and electrode heating was found, with the temperature elevation being approximately 0.9 times the local SAR value. Minor temperature elevations, <1 degrees C, were found with the fast spin-echo, magnetization prepared rapid acquisition gradient-echo, and echo-planar clinical imaging sequences. The high dB/dt echo-planar imaging sequence had no significant heating independent of SAR considerations. Sequences with magnetization transfer pulses produced temperature elevations in the 1.0 to 2.0 degrees C range, which was less than theoretically predicted for the relatively high SAR values. CONCLUSION: A potential exists for excessive MR imaging-related heating in patients with deep brain stimulation electrodes; however, the temperature increases are linearly related to SAR values. Clinical imaging sequences that are associated with tolerable temperature elevations in the <or=2.0 degrees C range at the electrode tips can be performed safely within an SAR range <2.4 W/kg local (0.9 W/kg whole body averaged).
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent work has shown a potential for excessive heating of deep brain stimulation electrodes during MR imaging. This in vitro study investigates the relationship between electrode heating and the specific absorption rate (SAR) of several MR images. METHODS: In vitro testing was performed by using a 1.5-T MR imaging system and a head transmit-receive coil, with bilateral deep brain stimulation systems positioned in a gel saline-filled phantom, and temperature monitoring with a fluoroptic thermometry system. Standardized fast spin-echo sequences were performed over a range of high, medium, and low SAR values. Several additional, clinically important MR imaging techniques, including 3D magnetization prepared rapid acquisition gradient-echo imaging, echo-planar imaging, quantitative magnetization transfer imaging, and magnetization transfer-suppressed MR angiography, were also tested by using typical parameters. RESULTS: A significant, highly linear relationship between SAR and electrode heating was found, with the temperature elevation being approximately 0.9 times the local SAR value. Minor temperature elevations, <1 degrees C, were found with the fast spin-echo, magnetization prepared rapid acquisition gradient-echo, and echo-planar clinical imaging sequences. The high dB/dt echo-planar imaging sequence had no significant heating independent of SAR considerations. Sequences with magnetization transfer pulses produced temperature elevations in the 1.0 to 2.0 degrees C range, which was less than theoretically predicted for the relatively high SAR values. CONCLUSION: A potential exists for excessive MR imaging-related heating in patients with deep brain stimulation electrodes; however, the temperature increases are linearly related to SAR values. Clinical imaging sequences that are associated with tolerable temperature elevations in the <or=2.0 degrees C range at the electrode tips can be performed safely within an SAR range <2.4 W/kg local (0.9 W/kg whole body averaged).
Authors: Ariel Roguin; Menekhem M Zviman; Glenn R Meininger; E Rene Rodrigues; Timm M Dickfeld; David A Bluemke; Albert Lardo; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins; Henry R Halperin Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-07-26 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ahmad Alhourani; Michael M McDowell; Michael J Randazzo; Thomas A Wozny; Efstathios D Kondylis; Witold J Lipski; Sarah Beck; Jordan F Karp; Avniel S Ghuman; R Mark Richardson Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2015-08-12 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: C H Vite; S Magnitsky; D Aleman; P O'Donnell; K Cullen; W Ding; S Pickup; J H Wolfe; H Poptani Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Alexander Pfeil; Stefanie Drobnik; Reinhard Rzanny; Anas Aboud; Joachim Böttcher; Peter Schmidt; Christian Ortmann; Gita Mall; Khosro Hekmat; Bernhard Brehm; Juergen Reichenbach; Thomas E Mayer; Gunter Wolf; Andreas Hansch Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-02-24 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Matthew J Boring; Zachary F Jessen; Thomas A Wozny; Michael J Ward; Ashley C Whiteman; R Mark Richardson; Avniel Singh Ghuman Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2019-05-31 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Laleh Golestanirad; Maria Ida Iacono; Boris Keil; Leonardo M Angelone; Giorgio Bonmassar; Michael D Fox; Todd Herrington; Elfar Adalsteinsson; Cristen LaPierre; Azma Mareyam; Lawrence L Wald Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Aaron D Losey; Prasheel Lillaney; Alastair J Martin; Van V Halbach; Daniel L Cooke; Christopher F Dowd; Randall T Higashida; David A Saloner; Mark W Wilson; Maythem Saeed; Steven W Hetts Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2013-05-18 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: David W Carmichael; John S Thornton; Roman Rodionov; Rachel Thornton; Andrew McEvoy; Philip J Allen; Louis Lemieux Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.813