Literature DB >> 25236353

Sensory perceptions of individuals exposed to the static field of a 7T MRI: A controlled blinded study.

Björn Friebe1, Astrid Wollrab2, Markus Thormann1, Katharina Fischbach1, Jens Ricke1, Marcus Grueschow3, Siegfried Kropf4, Frank Fischbach1, Oliver Speck2,5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the subjective experience of subjects undergoing 7T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared to a mock scanner with no magnetic field. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In all, 44 healthy subjects were exposed to both the B0 field of a 7T whole-body MRI and a realistic mock scanner with no magnetic field. Subjects were blinded to the actual field strength and no scanning was performed. After exposure, subjects rated their experience of potential sensory perceptions.
RESULTS: The most frequently observed side effect was vertigo while entering the gantry, which was reported by 38.6% (n = 17). Other frequent side effects were the appearance of phosphenes (18.2%, n = 8), thermal heat sensation (15.9%), unsteady gait after exposure (13.6%, n = 6), and dizziness (13.6%). All side effects were reported significantly more often after 7T exposure. Nine subjects (20.5%) did not report any sensory perceptions at all, ie, neither in the 7T scanner nor in the mock scanner.
CONCLUSION: Light, acute, and transient sensory perceptions can occur in subjects undergoing ultrahighfield MRI, of which vertigo seems to be the most frequently reported. Possible psychological effects might contribute to the emergence of such sensory perceptions, as some subjects also reported them to appear in a realistic mock scanner with no magnetic field.
© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  7T; MRI safety; magnetic resonance imaging; ultrahighfield MRI; vertigo

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25236353     DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24748

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 1053-1807            Impact factor:   4.813


  4 in total

1.  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

2.  Subjective perception of safety in healthy individuals working with 7 T MRI scanners: a retrospective multicenter survey.

Authors:  Mahsa Fatahi; Liliana Ramona Demenescu; Oliver Speck
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 3.  Occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields in magnetic resonance environment: an update on regulation, exposure assessment techniques, health risk evaluation, and surveillance.

Authors:  Valentina Hartwig; Giorgio Virgili; F Ederica Mattei; Cristiano Biagini; Stefania Romeo; Olga Zeni; Maria Rosaria Scarfì; Rita Massa; Francesco Campanella; Luigi Landini; Fabriziomaria Gobba; Alberto Modenese; Giulio Giovannetti
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 2.602

4.  The Effect of Contrast Enhanced Abdominopelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Expression and Methylation Level of ATM and AKT Genes.

Authors:  Amir Hossein Jalali; Hossein Mozdarani; Hossein Ghanaati
Journal:  Cell J       Date:  2021-07-17       Impact factor: 2.479

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.