MR Safety: Active Implanted Electronic Devices

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Are They Truly Still "Enemies"?

The application of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in clinical practice has grown due to technological advancements and expanded clinical indications, highlighting its superior capabilities when compared to echocardiography for the assessment of myocardial tissue. Similarly, the utilization of implantable cardiac electronic devices (CIEDs) has significantly increased in cardiac arrhythmia management, and the requirements of CMR examinations in patients with CIEDs has become more common. However, this type of exam often presents challenges due to safety concerns and image artifacts. Until a few years ago, the presence of CIED was considered an absolute contraindication to CMR. To address these challenges, various technical improvements in CIED technology, like the reduction of the ferromagnetic components, and in CMR examinations, such as the introduction of new sequences, have been developed. Moreover, a rigorous protocol involving multidisciplinary collaboration is recommended for safe CMR examinations in patients with CIEDs, emphasizing risk assessment, careful monitoring during CMR, and post-scan device evaluation. Alternative methods to CMR, such as computed tomography coronary angiography with tissue characterization techniques like dual-energy and photon-counting, offer alternative potential solutions, although their diagnostic accuracy and availability do limit their use. Despite technological advancements, close collaboration and specialized staff training remain crucial for obtaining safe diagnostic CMR images in patients with CIEDs, thus justifying the presence of specialized centers that are equipped to handle these type of exams.

MRI in Adult Patients with Active and Inactive Implanted MR-conditional, MR-nonconditional, and Other Devices

Active implanted medical devices (AIMDs) enable therapy and patient monitoring by way of electrical activity and typically have a battery and electrical leads. The most common types of AIMDs include cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), spinal cord stimulators, deep brain stimulators, bone growth or fusion stimulators, other neurostimulators, and drug infusion pumps. As more patients with AIMDs undergo MRI, it is important to consider the safety of patients who have these implanted devices during MRI. The authors review the physics concepts related to MRI safety, such as peak spatial gradient magnetic field, specific absorption rate, root mean square value of the effective magnetic component of the transmitted RF pulse, and gradient slew rate, as well as the parameters necessary to remain within safety limits. The roles of MRI safety personnel, as set forth by the International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, are emphasized. In addition, the relevant information provided in vendor manuals is reviewed, with a focus on how to obtain relevant up-to-date information. The radiologist should be able to modify protocols to meet safety requirements, address possible alternatives to MRI, and weigh the potential benefits of MRI against the potential risks. A few more advanced topics, such as fractured or abandoned device leads and patients with multiple implanted medical devices, also are addressed. Recommended workflows for MRI in patients with implanted medical devices are outlined. It is important to implement an algorithmic MRI safety process, including a review of the MRI safety information; patient screening; optimal imaging; and monitoring patients before, during, and after the examination. ©RSNA, 2024 Test Your Knowledge questions for this article are available in the supplemental material. See the invited commentary by Shetty et al in this issue.

Patient safety in magnetic resonance imaging

Image acquisition involves the use of static magnetic fields, field gradients and radiofrequency waves. These elements make the MRI a different modality. More and more centers work with 3.0 T equipment that present higher risks for the patient, compared to those of 1.5 T. Therefore, there is a need for updating for radiology staff that allows them to understand the risks and reduce them, since serious and even fatal incidents can occur. The objective of this work is to present a review and update of the risks to which patients are subjected during the performance of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) study.

Risk analysis of the Unity 1.5 T MR-Linac adapt-to-position workflow

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Newer technologies allow for daily treatment adaptation, providing the ability to account for setup variations and organ motion but comes at the cost of increasing the treatment workflow complexity. One such technology is the adapt-to-position (ATP) workflow on the Unity MR-Linac. Prospective risk assessment of a new workflow allows clinics to catch errors before they occur, especially for processes that include novel and unfamiliar steps.

METHODS

As part of a quality management program, failure modes and effects analysis was performed on the ATP treatment workflow following the recommendations of AAPM's Task Group 100. A multidisciplinary team was formed to identify and evaluate failure modes for all the steps taken during a daily treatment workflow. Failure modes of high severity and overall score were isolated and addressed.

RESULTS

Mitigations were determined for high-ranking failure modes and implemented into the clinic. High-ranking failure modes existed in all steps of the workflow. Failure modes were then rescored to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigations.

CONCLUSION

Failure modes and effects analysis on the Unity MR-Linac highlighted areas in the ATP workflow that could be prone to failures and allowed our clinic to change the process to be more robust.

Safety Considerations in MRI and CT

OBJECTIVE

MRI and CT are indispensable imaging modalities for the evaluation of patients with neurologic disease, and each is particularly well suited to address specific clinical questions. Although both of these imaging modalities have excellent safety profiles in clinical use as a result of concerted and dedicated efforts, each has potential physical and procedural risks that the practitioner should be aware of, which are described in this article.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Recent advancements have been made in understanding and reducing safety risks with MR and CT. The magnetic fields in MRI create risks for dangerous projectile accidents, radiofrequency burns, and deleterious interactions with implanted devices, and serious patient injuries and deaths have occurred. Ionizing radiation in CT may be associated with shorter-term deterministic effects on biological tissues at extremely high doses and longer-term stochastic effects related to mutagenesis and carcinogenesis at low doses. The cancer risk of radiation exposure in diagnostic CT is considered extremely low, and the benefit of an appropriately indicated CT examination far outweighs the potential risk. Continuing major efforts are centered on improving image quality and the diagnostic power of CT while concurrently keeping radiation doses as low as reasonably achievable.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

An understanding of these MRI and CT safety issues that are central to contemporary radiology practice is essential for the safe and effective treatment of patients with neurologic disease.

Diagnostic accuracy of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for suspected primary and postoperative pyogenic spondylitis

OBJECTIVE

Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (¹⁸F-FDG PET) and PET/CT have been suggested for confirming or excluding musculoskeletal infection but the diagnostic value of this tool for pyogenic spondylitis remains to be confirmed. This meta-analysis was performed to verify the accuracy of ¹⁸F-FDG PET and PET/CT in diagnosing suspected pyogenic spondylitis by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library to retrieve diagnostic accuracy studies in which suspected pyogenic spondylitis was assessed with ¹⁸F-FDG PET or PET/CT. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), summarized receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC) and the area under the sROC (AUC) were calculated by using Stata software.

RESULTS

A total of 18 eligible studies (660 patients) with suspected pyogenic spondylitis were included in the quantitative analysis. ¹⁸F-FDG PET and PET/CT illustrated relatively high sensitivity (0.91, 95% CI: 0.84-0.95) and specificity (0.90, 95% CI: 0.79-0.95) for the diagnosis of pyogenic spondylitis. The pooled DOR and AUC were 86.00 (95% CI, 31.00-240.00) and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.94-0.97), respectively. For diagnosing pyogenic spondylitis without previous spine surgery, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, DOR and AUC were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85-0.97), 0.91 (95% CI, 0.77-0.97), 136 (95% CI, 35-530) and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98), respectively. For diagnosing postoperative pyogenic spondylitis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, DOR and AUC were 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.93), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.96), 38 (95% CI, 9 to 167) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89 to 0.94), respectively.

CONCLUSION

¹⁸F-FDG PET and PET/CT presented satisfactory accuracy for diagnosing pyogenic spondylitis. The diagnostic effect of this nuclear imaging method for pyogenic spondylitis without previous spine surgery seems to be better than that for the postoperative ones. However, whether ¹⁸F-FDG PET and PET/CT could become a routine in patients with suspected pyogenic spondylitis remains to be confirmed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I evidence, a summary of meta-analysis.

Safety and Management of Implanted Epilepsy Devices for Imaging and Surgery

Permanently implanted devices that deliver electrical stimulation are increasingly used to treat patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Primary care physicians, neurologists, and epilepsy clinicians may encounter patients with a variety of implanted neuromodulation devices in the course of clinical care. Due to the rapidly changing landscape of available epilepsy-related neurostimulators, there may be uncertainty related to how these devices should be handled during imaging procedures and perioperative care. We review the safety and management of epilepsy-related implanted neurostimulators that may be encountered during imaging and surgery. We provide a summary of approved device labeling and recommendations for the practical management of these devices to help guide clinicians as they care for patients treated with bioelectronic medicine.

Practical considerations in epilepsy neurostimulation

Neuromodulation is a key therapeutic tool for clinicians managing patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Multiple devices are available with long-term follow-up and real-world experience. The aim of this review is to give a practical summary of available neuromodulation techniques to guide the selection of modalities, focusing on patient selection for devices, common approaches and techniques for initiation of programming, and outpatient management issues. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (DBS-ANT), and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) are all supported by randomized controlled trials that show safety and a significant impact on seizure reduction, as well as a suggestion of reduction in the risk of sudden unexplained death in epilepsy (SUDEP). Significant seizure reductions are observed after 3 months for DBS, RNS, and VNS in randomized controlled trials, and efficacy appears to improve with time out to 7 to 10 years of follow-up for all modalities, albeit in uncontrolled follow-up or retrospective studies. A significant number of patients experience seizure-free intervals of 6 months or more with all three modalities. Number and location of epileptogenic foci are important factors affecting efficacy, and together with comorbidities such as severe mood or sleep disorders, may influence the choice of modality. Programming has evolved-DBS is typically initiated at lower current/voltage than used in the pivotal trial, whereas target charge density is lower with RNS, however generalizable optimal parameters are yet to be defined. Noninvasive brain stimulation is an emerging stimulation modality, although it is currently not used widely. In summary, clinical practice has evolved from those established in pivotal trials. Guidance is now available for clinicians who wish to expand their approach, and choice of neuromodulation technique may be tailored to individual patients based on their epilepsy characteristics, risk tolerance, and preferences.

Intraoperative MR Imaging during Glioma Resection

One of the major issues in the surgical treatment of gliomas is the concern about maximizing the extent of resection while minimizing neurological impairment. Thus, surgical planning by carefully observing the relationship between the glioma infiltration area and eloquent area of the connecting fibers is crucial. Neurosurgeons usually detect an eloquent area by functional MRI and identify a connecting fiber by diffusion tensor imaging. However, during surgery, the accuracy of neuronavigation can be decreased due to brain shift, but the positional information may be updated by intraoperative MRI and the next steps can be planned accordingly. In addition, various intraoperative modalities may be used to guide surgery, including neurophysiological monitoring that provides real-time information (e.g., awake surgery, motor-evoked potentials, and sensory evoked potential); photodynamic diagnosis, which can identify high-grade glioma cells; and other imaging techniques that provide anatomical information during the surgery. In this review, we present the historical and current context of the intraoperative MRI and some related approaches for an audience active in the technical, clinical, and research areas of radiology, as well as mention important aspects regarding safety and types of devices.

New Insights into MR Safety for Implantable Medical Devices

Over the last two decades, the status of MR safety has dramatically changed. In particular, ever since the MR-conditional cardiac device was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2008 and by the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) in 2012, the safety of patients with an implantable medical device (IMD) has been one of the most important issues in terms of MR use. In conjunction with the regulatory approvals for various IMDs, standards, technical specifications, and guidelines have also been rapidly created and developed. Many invaluable papers investigating and reviewing the history and status of MR use in the presence of IMDs already exist. As such, this review paper seeks to bridge the gap between clinical practice and the information that is obtained by standard-based tests and provided by an IMD's package insert or instructions for use. Interpretation of the gradient of the magnetic flux density intensity of the static magnetic field with respect to the magnetic displacement force is discussed, along with the physical background of RF field. The relationship between specific absorption rate (SAR) and B1+RMS, and their effects on image quality are described. In addition, insofar as providing new directions for future research and practice, the feasibility of safety test methods for RF-induced heating of IMDs using MR thermometry, evaluation of tissue heat damage, and challenges in cardiac IMDs will be discussed.