Literature DB >> 17290435

Cognitive effects of head-movements in stray fields generated by a 7 Tesla whole-body MRI magnet.

F de Vocht1, T Stevens, P Glover, A Sunderland, P Gowland, H Kromhout.   

Abstract

The study investigates the impact of exposure to the stray magnetic field of a whole-body 7 T MRI scanner on neurobehavioral performance and cognition. Twenty seven volunteers completed four sessions, which exposed them to approximately 1600 mT (twice), 800 mT and negligible static field exposure. The order of exposure was assigned at random and was masked by placing volunteers in a tent to hide their position relative to the magnet bore. Volunteers completed a test battery assessing auditory working memory, eye-hand co-ordination, and visual perception. During three sessions the volunteers were instructed to complete a series of standardized head movements to generate additional time-varying fields ( approximately 300 and approximately 150 mT.s(-1) r.m.s.). In one session, volunteers were instructed to keep their heads as stable as possible. Performance on a visual tracking task was negatively influenced (P<.01) by 1.3% per 100 mT exposure. Furthermore, there was a trend for performance on two cognitive-motor tests to be decreased (P<.10). No effects were observed on working memory. Taken together with results of earlier studies, these results suggest that there are effects on visual perception and hand-eye co-ordination, but these are weak and variable between studies. The magnitude of these effects may depend on the magnitude of time-varying fields and not so much on the static field. While this study did not include exposure above 1.6 T, it suggests that use of strong magnetic fields is not a significant confounder in fMRI studies of cognitive function. Future work should further assess whether ultra-high field may impair performance of employees working in the vicinity of these magnets. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17290435     DOI: 10.1002/bem.20311

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioelectromagnetics        ISSN: 0197-8462            Impact factor:   2.010


  13 in total

Review 1.  Occupational exposure in MRI.

Authors:  D W McRobbie
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Subjective acceptance of 7 Tesla MRI for human imaging.

Authors:  Jens M Theysohn; Stefan Maderwald; Oliver Kraff; Christoph Moenninghoff; Mark E Ladd; Susanne C Ladd
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2007-12-07       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 3.  MR Imaging of the Musculoskeletal System Using Ultrahigh Field (7T) MR Imaging.

Authors:  Hamza Alizai; Gregory Chang; Ravinder R Regatte
Journal:  PET Clin       Date:  2018-10

4.  Health effects and safety of magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Frank de Vocht; Jonna Wilén; Kjell Hansson Mild; Lotte E van Nierop; Pauline Slottje; Hans Kromhout
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 4.460

5.  [Problems and chances of high field magnetic resonance imaging].

Authors:  M E Ladd; M Bock
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 0.635

6.  10.5 T MRI static field effects on human cognitive, vestibular, and physiological function.

Authors:  Andrea Grant; Gregory J Metzger; Pierre-François Van de Moortele; Gregor Adriany; Cheryl Olman; Lin Zhang; Joseph Koopermeiners; Yiğitcan Eryaman; Margaret Koeritzer; Meredith E Adams; Thomas R Henry; Kamil Uğurbil
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2020-08-18       Impact factor: 2.546

7.  Circular swimming in mice after exposure to a high magnetic field.

Authors:  Thomas A Houpt; Charles E Houpt
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2010-03-03

Review 8.  Vestibular stimulation by magnetic fields.

Authors:  Bryan K Ward; Dale C Roberts; Charles C Della Santina; John P Carey; David S Zee
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 5.691

Review 9.  Magnetic resonance safety.

Authors:  Steffen Sammet
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2016-03

10.  Vestibular effects of a 7 Tesla MRI examination compared to 1.5 T and 0 T in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Jens M Theysohn; Oliver Kraff; Kristina Eilers; Dorian Andrade; Marcus Gerwig; Dagmar Timmann; Franz Schmitt; Mark E Ladd; Susanne C Ladd; Andreas K Bitz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.