Ehud J Schmidt1, Ronald D Watkins2, Menekhem M Zviman2, Michael A Guttman2, Wei Wang2, Henry A Halperin2. 1. From the Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA (E.J.S., W.W.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, CA (R.D.W.); and Department of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD (M.M.Z., M.A.G., H.A.H.). eschmidt3@partners.org. 2. From the Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA (E.J.S., W.W.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University, CA (R.D.W.); and Department of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD (M.M.Z., M.A.G., H.A.H.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subjects undergoing cardiac arrest within a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner are currently removed from the bore and then from the MRI suite, before the delivery of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation, potentially increasing the risk of mortality. This precludes many higher-risk (acute ischemic and acute stroke) patients from undergoing MRI and MRI-guided intervention. An MRI-conditional cardiac defibrillator should enable scanning with defibrillation pads attached and the generator ON, enabling application of defibrillation within the seconds of MRI after a cardiac event. An MRI-conditional external defibrillator may improve patient acceptance for MRI procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: A commercial external defibrillator was rendered 1.5 Tesla MRI-conditional by the addition of novel radiofrequency filters between the generator and commercial disposable surface pads. The radiofrequency filters reduced emission into the MRI scanner and prevented cable/surface pad heating during imaging, while preserving all the defibrillator monitoring and delivery functions. Human volunteers were imaged using high specific absorption rate sequences to validate MRI image quality and lack of heating. Swine were electrically fibrillated (n=4) and thereafter defibrillated both outside and inside the MRI bore. MRI image quality was reduced by 0.8 or 1.6 dB, with the generator in monitoring mode and operating on battery or AC power, respectively. Commercial surface pads did not create artifacts deeper than 6 mm below the skin surface. Radiofrequency heating was within US Food and Drug Administration guidelines. Defibrillation was completely successful inside and outside the MRI bore. CONCLUSIONS: A prototype MRI-conditional defibrillation system successfully defibrillated in the MRI without degrading the image quality or increasing the time needed for defibrillation. It can increase patient acceptance for MRI procedures.
BACKGROUND: Subjects undergoing cardiac arrest within a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner are currently removed from the bore and then from the MRI suite, before the delivery of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation, potentially increasing the risk of mortality. This precludes many higher-risk (acute ischemic and acute stroke) patients from undergoing MRI and MRI-guided intervention. An MRI-conditional cardiac defibrillator should enable scanning with defibrillation pads attached and the generator ON, enabling application of defibrillation within the seconds of MRI after a cardiac event. An MRI-conditional external defibrillator may improve patient acceptance for MRI procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: A commercial external defibrillator was rendered 1.5 Tesla MRI-conditional by the addition of novel radiofrequency filters between the generator and commercial disposable surface pads. The radiofrequency filters reduced emission into the MRI scanner and prevented cable/surface pad heating during imaging, while preserving all the defibrillator monitoring and delivery functions. Human volunteers were imaged using high specific absorption rate sequences to validate MRI image quality and lack of heating. Swine were electrically fibrillated (n=4) and thereafter defibrillated both outside and inside the MRI bore. MRI image quality was reduced by 0.8 or 1.6 dB, with the generator in monitoring mode and operating on battery or AC power, respectively. Commercial surface pads did not create artifacts deeper than 6 mm below the skin surface. Radiofrequency heating was within US Food and Drug Administration guidelines. Defibrillation was completely successful inside and outside the MRI bore. CONCLUSIONS: A prototype MRI-conditional defibrillation system successfully defibrillated in the MRI without degrading the image quality or increasing the time needed for defibrillation. It can increase patient acceptance for MRI procedures.
Authors: Emanuel Kanal; A James Barkovich; Charlotte Bell; James P Borgstede; William G Bradley; Jerry W Froelich; J Rod Gimbel; John W Gosbee; Ellisa Kuhni-Kaminski; Paul A Larson; James W Lester; John Nyenhuis; Daniel Joe Schaefer; Elizabeth A Sebek; Jeffrey Weinreb; Bruce L Wilkoff; Terry O Woods; Leonard Lucey; Dina Hernandez Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-01-23 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Eugene G Kholmovski; Nicolas Coulombe; Joshua Silvernagel; Nathan Angel; Dennis Parker; Rob Macleod; Nassir Marrouche; Ravi Ranjan Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2016-03-21
Authors: Ali S Saber Tehrani; Diarmuid Coughlan; Yu Hsiang Hsieh; Georgios Mantokoudis; Fredrick K Korley; Kevin A Kerber; Kevin D Frick; David E Newman-Toker Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Zion Tsz Ho Tse; Charles L Dumoulin; Gari D Clifford; Jeff Schweitzer; Lei Qin; Julien Oster; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Raymond Y Kwong; Gregory Michaud; William G Stevenson; Ehud J Schmidt Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Elliott M Antman; Daniel T Anbe; Paul Wayne Armstrong; Eric R Bates; Lee A Green; Mary Hand; Judith S Hochman; Harlan M Krumholz; Frederick G Kushner; Gervasio A Lamas; Charles J Mullany; Joseph P Ornato; David L Pearle; Michael A Sloan; Sidney C Smith; Joseph S Alpert; Jeffrey L Anderson; David P Faxon; Valentin Fuster; Raymond J Gibbons; Gabriel Gregoratos; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; Sharon Ann Hunt; Alice K Jacobs Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-08-31 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jens Vogel-Claussen; Jan Skrok; David Dombroski; Steven M Shea; Edward P Shapiro; Mark Bohlman; Christine H Lorenz; Joao A C Lima; David A Bluemke Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Nynke M Swart; Kim K van Oudenaarde; Paul R Algra; Partick J E Bindels; Wilbert B van den Hout; Bart W Koes; Rob G H H Nelissen; Jan A N Verhaar; Hans J L Bloem; Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra; Monique M Reijnierse; Pim A J Luijsterburg Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2014-03-03 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Adrienne E Campbell-Washburn; Mohammad A Tavallaei; Mihaela Pop; Elena K Grant; Henry Chubb; Kawal Rhode; Graham A Wright Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-05-11 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Ehud J Schmidt; Hassan Elahi; Eric S Meyer; Ryan Baumgaertner; Luca Neri; Ronald D Berger; Harikrishna Tandri; David W Hunter; Steven P Cohen; Matt T Oberdier; Henry R Halperin Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2022-02-28 Impact factor: 6.779
Authors: Adrienne E Campbell-Washburn; Toby Rogers; Annette M Stine; Jaffar M Khan; Rajiv Ramasawmy; William H Schenke; Delaney R McGuirt; Jonathan R Mazal; Laurie P Grant; Elena K Grant; Daniel A Herzka; Robert J Lederman Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2018-06-21 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Rahul K Mukherjee; Caroline Mendonca Costa; Radhouene Neji; James L Harrison; Iain Sim; Steven E Williams; John Whitaker; Henry Chubb; Louisa O'Neill; Rainer Schneider; Tom Lloyd; Thomas Pohl; Sébastien Roujol; Steven A Niederer; Reza Razavi; Mark D O'Neill Journal: Europace Date: 2019-09-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Vladimir Shusterman; Denice Hodgson-Zingman; Daniel Thedens; Xiaodong Zhu; Stacy Hoffman; Jessica C Sieren; Gina M Morgan; Anthony Faranesh; Barry London Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2019-08-05 Impact factor: 5.364