A M Franceschi1, G C Wiggins1, A Y Mogilner2, T Shepherd1, S Chung1, Y W Lui3. 1. From the Departments of Radiology (A.M.F., G.C.W., T.S., S.C., Y.W.L.). 2. Neurosurgery (A.Y.M.), New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York. 3. From the Departments of Radiology (A.M.F., G.C.W., T.S., S.C., Y.W.L.) Yvonne.lui@nyumc.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Obtaining high-resolution brain MR imaging in patients with a previously implanted deep brain stimulator has been challenging and avoided by many centers due to safety concerns relating to implantable devices. We present our experience with a practical clinical protocol at 1.5T by using 2 magnet systems capable of achieving presurgical quality imaging in patients undergoing bilateral, staged deep brain stimulator insertion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Protocol optimization was performed to minimize the specific absorption rate while providing image quality necessary for adequate surgical planning of the second electrode placement. We reviewed MR imaging studies performed with a minimal specific absorption rate protocol in patients with a deep brain stimulator in place at our institution between February 1, 2012, and August 1, 2015. Images were reviewed by a neuroradiologist and a functional neurosurgeon. Image quality was qualitatively graded, and the presence of artifacts was noted. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (22 with Parkinson disease, 6 with dystonia, 1 with essential tremor) were imaged with at least 1 neuromodulation implant in situ. All patients were imaged under general anesthesia. There were 25 subthalamic and 4 globus pallidus implants. Nineteen patients were preoperative for the second stage of bilateral deep brain stimulator placement; 10 patients had bilateral electrodes in situ and were being imaged for other neurologic indications, including lead positioning. No adverse events occurred during or after imaging. Mild device-related local susceptibility artifacts were present in all studies, but they were not judged to affect overall image quality. Minimal aliasing artifacts were seen in 7, and moderate motion, in 4 cases on T1WI only. All preoperative studies were adequate for guidance of a second deep brain stimulator placement. CONCLUSIONS: An optimized MR imaging protocol that minimizes the specific absorption rate can be used to safely obtain high-quality images in patients with previously implanted deep brain stimulators, and these images are adequate for surgical guidance.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Obtaining high-resolution brain MR imaging in patients with a previously implanted deep brain stimulator has been challenging and avoided by many centers due to safety concerns relating to implantable devices. We present our experience with a practical clinical protocol at 1.5T by using 2 magnet systems capable of achieving presurgical quality imaging in patients undergoing bilateral, staged deep brain stimulator insertion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Protocol optimization was performed to minimize the specific absorption rate while providing image quality necessary for adequate surgical planning of the second electrode placement. We reviewed MR imaging studies performed with a minimal specific absorption rate protocol in patients with a deep brain stimulator in place at our institution between February 1, 2012, and August 1, 2015. Images were reviewed by a neuroradiologist and a functional neurosurgeon. Image quality was qualitatively graded, and the presence of artifacts was noted. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (22 with Parkinson disease, 6 with dystonia, 1 with essential tremor) were imaged with at least 1 neuromodulation implant in situ. All patients were imaged under general anesthesia. There were 25 subthalamic and 4 globus pallidus implants. Nineteen patients were preoperative for the second stage of bilateral deep brain stimulator placement; 10 patients had bilateral electrodes in situ and were being imaged for other neurologic indications, including lead positioning. No adverse events occurred during or after imaging. Mild device-related local susceptibility artifacts were present in all studies, but they were not judged to affect overall image quality. Minimal aliasing artifacts were seen in 7, and moderate motion, in 4 cases on T1WI only. All preoperative studies were adequate for guidance of a second deep brain stimulator placement. CONCLUSIONS: An optimized MR imaging protocol that minimizes the specific absorption rate can be used to safely obtain high-quality images in patients with previously implanted deep brain stimulators, and these images are adequate for surgical guidance.
Authors: Ali R Rezai; Kenneth B Baker; Jean A Tkach; Michael Phillips; Greg Hrdlicka; Ashwini D Sharan; John Nyenhuis; Paul Ruggieri; Frank G Shellock; Jaimie Henderson Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Michele Tagliati; Joseph Jankovic; Fernando Pagan; Frandy Susatia; Ioannis U Isaias; Michael S Okun Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2009-04-17 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Subhendra N Sarkar; Efstathios Papavassiliou; David B Hackney; David C Alsop; Ludy C Shih; Ananth J Madhuranthakam; Reed F Busse; Susan La Ruche; Rafeeque A Bhadelia Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Jaimie M Henderson; Jean Tkach; Michael Phillips; Kenneth Baker; Frank G Shellock; Ali R Rezai Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Jörg Spiegel; Gerhard Fuss; Martin Backens; Wolfgang Reith; Tim Magnus; Georg Becker; Jean-Richard Moringlane; Ulrich Dillmann Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Vaninder Chhabra; Edward Sung; Klaus Mewes; Roy A E Bakay; Aviva Abosch; Robert E Gross Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 5.115