Literature DB >> 32822819

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

Andrea Grant1, Gregory J Metzger2, Pierre-François Van de Moortele2, Gregor Adriany2, Cheryl Olman3, Lin Zhang4, Joseph Koopermeiners4, Yiğitcan Eryaman2, Margaret Koeritzer5, Meredith E Adams6, Thomas R Henry7, Kamil Uğurbil2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To perform a pilot study to quantitatively assess cognitive, vestibular, and physiological function during and after exposure to a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system with a static field strength of 10.5 Tesla at multiple time scales.
METHODS: A total of 29 subjects were exposed to a 10.5 T MRI field and underwent vestibular, cognitive, and physiological testing before, during, and after exposure; for 26 subjects, testing and exposure were repeated within 2-4 weeks of the first visit. Subjects also reported sensory perceptions after each exposure. Comparisons were made between short and long term time points in the study with respect to the parameters measured in the study; short term comparison included pre-vs-isocenter and pre-vs-post (1-24 h), while long term compared pre-exposures 2-4 weeks apart.
RESULTS: Of the 79 comparisons, 73 parameters were unchanged or had small improvements after magnet exposure. The exceptions to this included lower scores on short term (i.e. same day) executive function testing, greater isocenter spontaneous eye movement during visit 1 (relative to pre-exposure), increased number of abnormalities on videonystagmography visit 2 versus visit 1 and a mix of small increases (short term visit 2) and decreases (short term visit 1) in blood pressure. In addition, more subjects reported metallic taste at 10.5 T in comparison to similar data obtained in previous studies at 7 T and 9.4 T.
CONCLUSION: Initial results of 10.5 T static field exposure indicate that 1) cognitive performance is not compromised at isocenter, 2) subjects experience increased eye movement at isocenter, and 3) subjects experience small changes in vital signs but no field-induced increase in blood pressure. While small but significant differences were found in some comparisons, none were identified as compromising subject safety. A modified testing protocol informed by these results was devised with the goal of permitting increased enrollment while providing continued monitoring to evaluate field effects.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive function; Human vital signs; MRI safety; Physiologic function; Static magnetic field; Ultra-high field MRI; Vestibular function

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32822819      PMCID: PMC7534367          DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2020.08.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 0730-725X            Impact factor:   2.546


  63 in total

1.  Parallel imaging performance as a function of field strength--an experimental investigation using electrodynamic scaling.

Authors:  Florian Wiesinger; Pierre-Francois Van de Moortele; Gregor Adriany; Nicola De Zanche; Kamil Ugurbil; Klaas P Pruessmann
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 4.668

2.  9.4T human MRI: preliminary results.

Authors:  Thomas Vaughan; Lance DelaBarre; Carl Snyder; Jinfeng Tian; Can Akgun; Devashish Shrivastava; Wanzahn Liu; Chris Olson; Gregor Adriany; John Strupp; Peter Andersen; Anand Gopinath; Pierre-Francois van de Moortele; Michael Garwood; Kamil Ugurbil
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  The measurement of blood pressure: sitting or supine, once or twice?

Authors:  M J Jamieson; J Webster; S Philips; T A Jeffers; A K Scott; O J Robb; H G Lovell; J C Petrie
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 4.844

4.  Effects of supine and lateral positions on cardiac output and intracardiac pressures: an experimental study.

Authors:  S Nakao; P C Come; M J Miller; S Momomura; P Sahagian; B J Ransil; W Grossman
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  The Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale.

Authors:  L E Powell; A M Myers
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 6.053

6.  The ten-minute examination of the dizzy patient.

Authors:  J A Goebel
Journal:  Semin Neurol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.420

7.  The ultimate signal-to-noise ratio in realistic body models.

Authors:  Bastien Guérin; Jorge F Villena; Athanasios G Polimeridis; Elfar Adalsteinsson; Luca Daniel; Jacob K White; Lawrence L Wald
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2016-12-04       Impact factor: 4.668

8.  Positional and positioning nystagmus in healthy subjects under videonystagmoscopy.

Authors:  Kishiko Sunami; Rie Tochino; Takashi Zushi; Hidefumi Yamamoto; Yasutake Tokuhara; Hiroyoshi Iguchi; Masahiro Takayama; Kazuo Konishi; Hideo Yamane
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol Suppl       Date:  2004-10

Review 9.  Evolution of UHF Body Imaging in the Human Torso at 7T: Technology, Applications, and Future Directions.

Authors:  M Arcan Erturk; Xiufeng Li; Pierre-Fancois Van de Moortele; Kamil Ugurbil; Gregory J Metzger
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-06

10.  Static posturography in aging and Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  Guntram W Ickenstein; Helmut Ambach; Antonia Klöditz; Horst Koch; Stefan Isenmann; Heinz Reichmann; Tjalf Ziemssen
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2012-08-06       Impact factor: 5.750

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  The Promise of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Radiation Oncology Practice in the Management of Brain, Prostate, and GI Malignancies.

Authors:  Shashank Srinivasan; Archya Dasgupta; Abhishek Chatterjee; Akshay Baheti; Reena Engineer; Tejpal Gupta; Vedang Murthy
Journal:  JCO Glob Oncol       Date:  2022-05

2.  Long-term behavioral effects observed in mice chronically exposed to static ultra-high magnetic fields.

Authors:  Ivan Tkáč; Michael A Benneyworth; Tessa Nichols-Meade; Elizabeth L Steuer; Sarah N Larson; Gregory J Metzger; Kâmil Uğurbil
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2021-04-06       Impact factor: 4.668

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.  Effects of High Magnetic Fields on the Diffusion of Biologically Active Molecules.

Authors:  Vitalii Zablotskii; Tatyana Polyakova; Alexandr Dejneka
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2021-12-28       Impact factor: 6.600

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.