Top

European Radiology

Published in:

01-08-2014 | Magnetic Resonance

Short-term side-effects of brain MR examination at 7 T: a single-centre experience

Authors: M. Cosottini, D. Frosini, L. Biagi, I. Pesaresi, M. Costagli, G. Tiberi, M. Symms, M. Tosetti

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 8/2014

Abstract

Objective

To study patient tolerability of brain imaging that employs an ultrahigh field (7 T) MR system

Methods

We examined 180 subjects that underwent brain MR examination at 7 T. A tolerability test consisting of two parts (during patient table motion and during the examination) was administered to all subjects in order to monitor their discomfort. The scores range from 0 to 5 for the first part, and from 0 to 10 for the second part, the total score of each subject therefore ranging from 0 (no side effects reported) to 15 (lowest tolerability)

Results

A total of 51 % of subjects reported at least one side effect but all were mild in intensity and did not require examination interruption. No serious adverse event was reported. The total score (mean ± standard deviation) was 1.1 ± 1.5 out of 15 (mean score 0.4 ± 0.7 out of 5 during patient table motion and 0.7 ± 1.1 out of 10 during MR).

Patient discomfort was not related to gender or health status, but it was reduced with time after system installation with increasing operator experience in performing UHF MR examinations.

Conclusions

Ultrahigh field MRI is well tolerated without excessive discomfort to subjects.

Key Points

• 7-T MRI is well tolerated with low incidence of side effects

• The subjects’ discomfort during 7-T MRI is reduced as the operators’ experience increases

• 7-T MRI is practicable in healthy subjects and patients with neurodegenerative diseases

Knopp MV (2011) Clinical applications of ultra-high field 7T MR – moving to FDA/EU approval: potential clinical applications for ultra-high field MR. Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med 19

International Electro Technical Commission (2002) Medical electrical equipment—Part 2–33: particular requirements for the safety of magnetic resonance equipment for medical diagnosis. IEC 60601-2-33

United States Food and Drug Administration (2003) Guidance for industry and FDA staff: criteria for significant risk investigations of magnetic resonance diagnostic devices. Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Rockville

International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM) http://www.ismrm.org.

van Nierop LE, Slottje P, Kingma H, Kromhout H (2013) MRI-related static magnetic stray fields and postural body sway: a double-blind randomized crossover study. Magn Reson Med 70:232–240PubMedCrossRef

Schenck JF (2005) Physical interactions of static magnetic fields with living tissues. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 87:185–204PubMedCrossRef

Kangarlu A, Robitaille P (2000) Biological effects and health implications in magnetic resonance imaging. Concepts Magn Reson 12:321–359CrossRef

Collins CM, Li S, Smith MB (1998) SAR and B1 field distributions in a heterogeneous human head model within a birdcage coil. Magn Reson Med 40:847–856PubMedCrossRef

Machata AM, Willschke H, Kabon B, Prayer D, Marhofer P (2009) Effect of brain magnetic resonance imaging on body core temperature in sedated infants and children Br J Anaesth 102:385–389

10.

Bryan YF, Templeton TW, Nick TG, Szafran M, Tung A (2006) Brain magnetic resonance imaging increases core body temperature in sedated children Anesth Analg 102:1674–1679

11.

van Lier ALHMW, Kotte ANTJ, Raaymakers BW, Lagendijk JJW, van den Berg CAT (2012) Radiofrequency heating induced by 7 T head MRI: thermal assessment using discrete vasculature or Pennes’ bioheat equation. J Magn Reson Imaging 35:795–803PubMedCrossRef

12.

Collins CM, Liu W, Wang J, Gruetter R, Vaughan JT, Ugurbil K, Smith MB (2004) Temperature and SAR calculations for a human head within volume and surface coils at 64 and 300 MHz. J Magn Reson Imaging 19:650–656PubMedCrossRef

13.

Heilmaier C, Theysohn JM, Maderwald S, Kraff O, Ladd ME, Ladd SC (2011) A large-scale study on subjective perception of discomfort during 7 and 1.5 T MRI examinations. Bioelectromagnetics 32:610–619PubMedCrossRef

14.

Versluis MJ, Teeuwisse WM, Kan HE, van Buchem MA, Webb AG, van Osch MJ (2013) Subject tolerance of 7 T MRI examinations. J Magn Reson Imaging 38(3):722–725PubMedCrossRef

15.

Frosini D, Pesaresi I, Biagi L, Dolce G, Costagli M, Tiberi G, Stara R, Tosetti M, Cosottini M (2013) Safety protocol for monitoring side-effects at 7 T. In: Proceedings of ISMRM workshop on ultra high field MRI, Noordwijk aan Zee, the Netherlands, 2–5 March 2013

16.

Glover PM, Cavin I, Qian W, Bowtell R, Gowland PA (2007) Magnetic-field-induced vertigo: a theoretical and experimental investigation. Bioelectromagnetics 28:349–361PubMedCrossRef

17.

van Nierop LE, Slottje P, van Zandvoort MJ, de Vocht F, Kromhout H (2012) Effects of magnetic stray fields from a 7 tesla MRI scanner on neurocognition: a double-blind randomised crossover study. Occup Environ Med 69:759–766PubMedCrossRef

18.

de Vocht F, van Drooge H, Engels H, Kromhout H (2006) Exposure, health complaints and cognitive performance among employees of an MRI scanners manufacturing department. J Magn Reson Imaging 23:197–204PubMedCrossRef

19.

More SR, Lim TC, Li M, Holland CK, Boyce SE, Lee JH (2006) Acoustic noise characteristics of a 4 Telsa MRI scanner. J Magn Reson Imaging 23(3):388–397PubMedCrossRef

20.

International Electrotechnical Commission (2008) Medical electrical equipment-Part 2-33: particular requirements for the basic safety and essential performance of magnetic resonance equipment for medical diagnosis. IEC 60601-2-33

21.

Hennel F, Girard F, Loenneker T (1999) “Silent” MRI with soft gradient pulses. Magn Reson Med 42:6–10PubMedCrossRef

22.

Theysohn JM, Maderwald S, Kraff O, Moenninghoff C, Ladd ME, Ladd SC (2008) Subjective acceptance of 7 Tesla MRI for human imaging. Magn Reson Mater Phys 21:63–72CrossRef

23.

Colloca L, Miller FG (2011) The nocebo effect and its relevance for clinical practice. Psychosom Med 73:598–603PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

24.

Barsky AJ, Saintfort R, Rogers MP, Borus JF (2002) Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon. JAMA 287(5):622–627PubMedCrossRef

Title: Short-term side-effects of brain MR examination at 7 T: a single-centre experience
Authors: M. Cosottini
D. Frosini
L. Biagi
I. Pesaresi
M. Costagli
G. Tiberi
M. Symms
M. Tosetti
Publication date: 01-08-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 8/2014
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3177-y

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Short-term side-effects of brain MR examination at 7 T: a single-centre experience

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2014

Abdominal aortic aneurysm calcification and thrombus volume are not associated with outcome following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Anatomical variations in the origins of the celiac axis and the superior mesenteric artery: MDCT angiographic findings and their probable embryological mechanisms

Erratum to: Preoperative lymph node staging in patients with primary prostate cancer: comparison and correlation of quantitative imaging parameters in diffusion-weighted imaging and 11C-choline PET/CT

Whole-body [18F]FDG PET/MRI vs. PET/CT in the assessment of bone lesions in oncological patients: initial results

Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation of cartilage repair after microfracture (MF) treatment for adult unstable osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) in the ankle: correlations with clinical outcome

Erratum to: Underestimation rate of lobular intraepithelial neoplasia in vacuum-assisted breast biopsy