Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Abdominal Radiology 12/2020

01-12-2020 | Brachytherapy | Special Section: Prostate cancer

MR safety considerations for patients undergoing prostate MRI

Author: Varaha S. Tammisetti

Published in: Abdominal Radiology | Issue 12/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Over the past decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of patients undergoing prostate MRI scans. Patients presenting for prostate MRI are an ageing population and may present with a variety of passive or active implants and devices. These implants and devices can be MR safe or MR conditional or MR unsafe. Patients with certain MR-conditional active implants and devices can safely obtain prostate MRI in a specified MR environment within specific MR imaging parameters. Prostate MRI and PET-MRI in patients with passive implants such as hip prostheses, fiducial markers for SBRT, brachytherapy seeds and prostatectomy bed clips have unique concerns for image optimization that can cause geometric distortion of the diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequence. We discuss strategies to overcome these susceptibility artifacts. Prostate MRI in patients with MR conditional active implants such as cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) also require modification of imaging parameters and magnet strength. In this setting, a diagnostic quality prostate MRI can be performed at a lower magnet strength (1.5 T) along with modification of imaging parameters to ensure patient safety. Imaging strategies to minimize susceptibility artifact and decrease the specific absorption rate (SAR) in both settings are described. Knowledge of MR safety considerations and imaging strategies specific to prostate MRI and PET-MRI in patients with implants and devices is essential to ensure diagnostic-quality MR images and patient safety.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gupta, R.T., et al., PI-RADS: Past, present, and future. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2019. Gupta, R.T., et al., PI-RADS: Past, present, and future. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2019.
2.
go back to reference Weinreb, J.C., et al., PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol, 2016. 69(1): p. 16-40. Weinreb, J.C., et al., PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol, 2016. 69(1): p. 16-40.
3.
go back to reference Czarniecki, M., et al., Role of PROPELLER-DWI of the prostate in reducing distortion and artefact from total hip replacement metalwork. Eur J Radiol, 2018. 102: p. 213-219. Czarniecki, M., et al., Role of PROPELLER-DWI of the prostate in reducing distortion and artefact from total hip replacement metalwork. Eur J Radiol, 2018. 102: p. 213-219.
4.
go back to reference Tanaka, T., et al., Safety and Image Quality of 1.5-T Endorectal Coil Multiparametric MRI of the Prostate or Prostatectomy Fossa for Patients With Pacemaker or Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 219. 212(4): p. 815-822. Tanaka, T., et al., Safety and Image Quality of 1.5-T Endorectal Coil Multiparametric MRI of the Prostate or Prostatectomy Fossa for Patients With Pacemaker or Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 219. 212(4): p. 815-822.
5.
go back to reference Ullrich, T., et al., Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate at 1.5 versus 3.0T: A prospective comparison study of image quality. Eur J Radiol, 2017. 90: p. 192-197. Ullrich, T., et al., Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate at 1.5 versus 3.0T: A prospective comparison study of image quality. Eur J Radiol, 2017. 90: p. 192-197.
6.
go back to reference Shellock, F.G., T.O. Woods, and J.V. Crues, 3rd, MR labeling information for implants and devices: explanation of terminology. Radiology, 2009. 253(1): p. 26-30. Shellock, F.G., T.O. Woods, and J.V. Crues, 3rd, MR labeling information for implants and devices: explanation of terminology. Radiology, 2009. 253(1): p. 26-30.
7.
go back to reference Shellock, F.G. and A. Spinazzi, MRI safety update 2008: part 2, screening patients for MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2008. 191(4): p. 1140-9. Shellock, F.G. and A. Spinazzi, MRI safety update 2008: part 2, screening patients for MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2008. 191(4): p. 1140-9.
8.
go back to reference Lowe, G., R.P. Smith, and R.A. Costabile, A catalog of magnetic resonance imaging compatibility of penile prostheses. J Sex Med, 2012. 9(5): p. 1482-7. Lowe, G., R.P. Smith, and R.A. Costabile, A catalog of magnetic resonance imaging compatibility of penile prostheses. J Sex Med, 2012. 9(5): p. 1482-7.
9.
go back to reference Panych, L.P. and B. Madore, The physics of MRI safety. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2018. 47(1): p. 28-43. Panych, L.P. and B. Madore, The physics of MRI safety. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2018. 47(1): p. 28-43.
10.
go back to reference Shellock, F.G. and J.V. Crues, MR procedures: biologic effects, safety, and patient care. Radiology, 2004. 232(3): p. 635-52. Shellock, F.G. and J.V. Crues, MR procedures: biologic effects, safety, and patient care. Radiology, 2004. 232(3): p. 635-52.
11.
go back to reference Graf, H., G. Steidle, and F. Schick, Heating of metallic implants and instruments induced by gradient switching in a 1.5-Tesla whole-body unit. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2007. 26(5): p. 1328-33. Graf, H., G. Steidle, and F. Schick, Heating of metallic implants and instruments induced by gradient switching in a 1.5-Tesla whole-body unit. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2007. 26(5): p. 1328-33.
13.
go back to reference Dedini, R.D., et al., MRI issues for ballistic objects: information obtained at 1.5-, 3- and 7-Tesla. Spine J, 2013. 13(7): p. 815-22. Dedini, R.D., et al., MRI issues for ballistic objects: information obtained at 1.5-, 3- and 7-Tesla. Spine J, 2013. 13(7): p. 815-22.
14.
go back to reference Maradit Kremers, H., et al., Prevalence of Total Hip and Knee Replacement in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2015. 97(17): p. 1386-97. Maradit Kremers, H., et al., Prevalence of Total Hip and Knee Replacement in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2015. 97(17): p. 1386-97.
15.
go back to reference Talbot, B.S. and E.P. Weinberg, MR Imaging with Metal-suppression Sequences for Evaluation of Total Joint Arthroplasty. Radiographics, 2016. 36(1): p. 209-25. Talbot, B.S. and E.P. Weinberg, MR Imaging with Metal-suppression Sequences for Evaluation of Total Joint Arthroplasty. Radiographics, 2016. 36(1): p. 209-25.
16.
go back to reference Zhuo, J. and R.P. Gullapalli, AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: MR artifacts, safety, and quality control. Radiographics, 2006. 26(1): p. 275-97. Zhuo, J. and R.P. Gullapalli, AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: MR artifacts, safety, and quality control. Radiographics, 2006. 26(1): p. 275-97.
17.
go back to reference Engels, R.R.M., et al., Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: What Urologists Need to Know. Part 1: Acquisition. Eur Urol, 2020. 77(4): p. 457-468. Engels, R.R.M., et al., Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: What Urologists Need to Know. Part 1: Acquisition. Eur Urol, 2020. 77(4): p. 457-468.
18.
go back to reference Fusco, R., et al., A systematic review on multiparametric MR imaging in prostate cancer detection. Infect Agent Cancer, 2017. 12: p. 57. Fusco, R., et al., A systematic review on multiparametric MR imaging in prostate cancer detection. Infect Agent Cancer, 2017. 12: p. 57.
19.
go back to reference Starobinets, O., et al., Practical aspects of prostate MRI: hardware and software considerations, protocols, and patient preparation. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2016. 41(5): p. 817-30. Starobinets, O., et al., Practical aspects of prostate MRI: hardware and software considerations, protocols, and patient preparation. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2016. 41(5): p. 817-30.
20.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz, A.B. and S.S. Taneja, Use of Reduced Field-of-View Acquisition to Improve Prostate Cancer Visualization on Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Presence of Hip Implants: Report of 2 Cases. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol, 2018. 47(2): p. 125-127. Rosenkrantz, A.B. and S.S. Taneja, Use of Reduced Field-of-View Acquisition to Improve Prostate Cancer Visualization on Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Presence of Hip Implants: Report of 2 Cases. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol, 2018. 47(2): p. 125-127.
21.
go back to reference Zand, K.R., et al., Artifacts and pitfalls in MR imaging of the pelvis. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2007. 26(3): p. 480-97. Zand, K.R., et al., Artifacts and pitfalls in MR imaging of the pelvis. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2007. 26(3): p. 480-97.
22.
go back to reference Kudura, K., et al., Metal artifact reduction in 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI for prostate cancer patients with hip joint replacement using multiacquisition variable-resonance image combination. European Journal of Hybrid Imaging, 2020. 4(1). Kudura, K., et al., Metal artifact reduction in 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI for prostate cancer patients with hip joint replacement using multiacquisition variable-resonance image combination. European Journal of Hybrid Imaging, 2020. 4(1).
23.
go back to reference Oppenheimer, D.C., et al., Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Recurrent Prostate Cancer. J Clin Imaging Sci, 2016. 6: p. 18. Oppenheimer, D.C., et al., Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Recurrent Prostate Cancer. J Clin Imaging Sci, 2016. 6: p. 18.
24.
go back to reference Gaur, S. and B. Turkbey, Prostate MR Imaging for Posttreatment Evaluation and Recurrence. Radiol Clin North Am, 2018. 56(2): p. 263-275. Gaur, S. and B. Turkbey, Prostate MR Imaging for Posttreatment Evaluation and Recurrence. Radiol Clin North Am, 2018. 56(2): p. 263-275.
25.
go back to reference Blanchard, P., C. Menard, and S.J. Frank, Clinical use of magnetic resonance imaging across the prostate brachytherapy workflow. Brachytherapy, 2017. 16(4): p. 734-742. Blanchard, P., C. Menard, and S.J. Frank, Clinical use of magnetic resonance imaging across the prostate brachytherapy workflow. Brachytherapy, 2017. 16(4): p. 734-742.
26.
go back to reference Holmes, O.E., et al., Reducing errors in prostate tracking with an improved fiducial implantation protocol for CyberKnife based stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). J Radiosurg SBRT, 2018. 5(3): p. 217-227. Holmes, O.E., et al., Reducing errors in prostate tracking with an improved fiducial implantation protocol for CyberKnife based stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). J Radiosurg SBRT, 2018. 5(3): p. 217-227.
27.
go back to reference Maspero, M., et al., Evaluation of gold fiducial marker manual localisation for magnetic resonance-only prostate radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol, 2018. 13(1): p. 105. Maspero, M., et al., Evaluation of gold fiducial marker manual localisation for magnetic resonance-only prostate radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol, 2018. 13(1): p. 105.
28.
go back to reference Safety, A.C.R.C.o.M., et al., ACR guidance document on MR safe practices: Updates and critical information 2019. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2020. 51(2): p. 331-338. Safety, A.C.R.C.o.M., et al., ACR guidance document on MR safe practices: Updates and critical information 2019. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2020. 51(2): p. 331-338.
29.
go back to reference Levine, G.N., et al., Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiovascular devices: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention: endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation, the North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. Circulation, 2007. 116(24): p. 2878-91. Levine, G.N., et al., Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiovascular devices: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention: endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation, the North American Society for Cardiac Imaging, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. Circulation, 2007. 116(24): p. 2878-91.
30.
go back to reference Shellock, F.G. and S. Valencerina, Septal repair implants: evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging safety at 3 T. Magn Reson Imaging, 2005. 23(10): p. 1021-5. Shellock, F.G. and S. Valencerina, Septal repair implants: evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging safety at 3 T. Magn Reson Imaging, 2005. 23(10): p. 1021-5.
31.
go back to reference Tsai, L.L., et al., A Practical Guide to MR Imaging Safety: What Radiologists Need to Know. Radiographics, 2015. 35(6): p. 1722-37. Tsai, L.L., et al., A Practical Guide to MR Imaging Safety: What Radiologists Need to Know. Radiographics, 2015. 35(6): p. 1722-37.
32.
go back to reference Kalb, B., et al., MRI of patients with implanted cardiac devices. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2018. 47(3): p. 595-603. Kalb, B., et al., MRI of patients with implanted cardiac devices. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2018. 47(3): p. 595-603.
33.
go back to reference Indik, J.H., et al., 2017 HRS expert consensus statement on magnetic resonance imaging and radiation exposure in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Heart Rhythm, 2017. 14(7): p. e97-e153. Indik, J.H., et al., 2017 HRS expert consensus statement on magnetic resonance imaging and radiation exposure in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Heart Rhythm, 2017. 14(7): p. e97-e153.
34.
go back to reference Naehle, C.P., et al., Safety of brain 3-T MR imaging with transmit-receive head coil in patients with cardiac pacemakers: pilot prospective study with 51 examinations. Radiology, 2008. 249(3): p. 991-1001. Naehle, C.P., et al., Safety of brain 3-T MR imaging with transmit-receive head coil in patients with cardiac pacemakers: pilot prospective study with 51 examinations. Radiology, 2008. 249(3): p. 991-1001.
35.
go back to reference Gimbel, J.R., Magnetic resonance imaging of implantable cardiac rhythm devices at 3.0 tesla. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol, 2008. 31(7): p. 795-801. Gimbel, J.R., Magnetic resonance imaging of implantable cardiac rhythm devices at 3.0 tesla. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol, 2008. 31(7): p. 795-801.
36.
go back to reference Russo, R.J., et al., Assessing the Risks Associated with MRI in Patients with a Pacemaker or Defibrillator. N Engl J Med, 2017. 376(8): p. 755-764. Russo, R.J., et al., Assessing the Risks Associated with MRI in Patients with a Pacemaker or Defibrillator. N Engl J Med, 2017. 376(8): p. 755-764.
38.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz, A.B., et al., T2-weighted prostate MRI at 7 Tesla using a simplified external transmit-receive coil array: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings in two prostate cancer patients. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2015. 41(1): p. 226-32. Rosenkrantz, A.B., et al., T2-weighted prostate MRI at 7 Tesla using a simplified external transmit-receive coil array: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings in two prostate cancer patients. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2015. 41(1): p. 226-32.
Metadata
Title
MR safety considerations for patients undergoing prostate MRI
Author
Varaha S. Tammisetti
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Abdominal Radiology / Issue 12/2020
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Electronic ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02730-0

Other articles of this Issue 12/2020

Abdominal Radiology 12/2020 Go to the issue

Special section: Prostate cancer update

Tips to start an MR-US fusion biopsy program

Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.