Literature DB >> 2068325

MR imaging and biomedical implants, materials, and devices: an updated review.

F G Shellock1, J S Curtis.   

Abstract

Certain ferromagnetic metallic implants, materials, and devices are regarded as contraindications for magnetic resonance imaging, primarily because of the risks associated with their movement or dislodgment. More than 40 publications have reported the ferromagnetic qualities of 261 different metallic objects (aneurysm and hemostatic clips, 32; carotid artery vascular clamps, five; dental devices or materials, 16; heart valve prostheses, 29; intravascular coils, filters, and stents, 14; ocular implants, 12; orthopedic implants, materials, and devices, 15; otologic implants, 56; pellets and bullets, 23; penile implants, nine; vascular access ports, 33; and miscellaneous, 17) on the basis of measurements of deflection forces or attraction during exposure to static magnetic fields at strengths of 0.147-4.7 T. The results of these studies are listed with respect to the specific object tested, the material used to construct the object (if known), whether or not the object was deflected or moved during exposure to the static magnetic field, and the highest static magnetic field strength used for testing the object.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1991        PMID: 2068325     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.180.2.2068325

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  10 in total

1.  H. M.'s medial temporal lobe lesion: findings from magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  S Corkin; D G Amaral; R G González; K A Johnson; B T Hyman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-05-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Safety of the adjustable pressure ventricular valve in magnetic resonance imaging: problems and solutions.

Authors:  P Fransen; G Dooms; C Thauvoy
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.804

3.  The influence of 1.5 and 3 T magnetic resonance unit magnetic fields on the movement of steel-jacketed projectiles in ordnance gelatin.

Authors:  Sebastian Eggert; Rahel A Kubik-Huch; Martin Lory; John M Froehlich; Dominic Gascho; Michael J Thali; Stephan A Bolliger
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 2.007

Review 4.  Radiological assessment of penile prosthesis: the role of magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Ignacio Moncada; José Jara; Ramiro Cabello; Juan Ignacio Monzo; Carlos Hernández
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2004-10-30       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Behavior of metal implants used in ENT surgery in 7 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Ariane Thelen; Hans-Christian Bauknecht; Patrick Asbach; Thomas Schrom
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2006-07-12       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Safety of intrauterine contraceptive devices during MR imaging.

Authors:  T Hess; B Stepanow; M V Knopp
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Magnetization and demagnetization of magnetic dental attachments in a 3-T MRI system.

Authors:  Norio Hayashi; Akio Ogura; Toshio Tsuchihashi; Daisuke Takahashi; Tsuyoshi Matsuda; Shinya Seino; Tsukasa Doi
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2017-04-27

8.  Artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging of the spine after surgery with or without implant.

Authors:  H Leclet
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Ambulatory follow-up of aortic dissection: comparison between computed tomography and biplane transesophageal echocardiography.

Authors:  S Maffei; M Baroni; M Terrazzi; M Piacenti; F Paoli; E Camerini; F Verunelli; L Salvatore; A Biagini
Journal:  Int J Card Imaging       Date:  1996-06

10.  Evaluation of magnetic behaviour and in vitro biocompatibility of ferritic PM2000 alloy.

Authors:  M S Flores; G Ciapetti; J L González-Carrasco; M A Montealegre; M Multigner; S Pagani; G Rivero
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.896

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.