Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2017.40.1.04

In Vitro Assessment of MRI Safety at 1.5 T and 3.0 T for Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Implant  

Yeon, Kyoo-Jin (Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center)
Kim, Hyun-Soo (Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center)
Lee, Seung-keun (Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center)
Lee, Tae-Soo (Department of Biomedical Engineering, Chungbuk National University)
Publication Information
Journal of radiological science and technology / v.40, no.1, 2017 , pp. 19-25 More about this Journal
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate Magnetic Resonance Imaging safety by measuring the translational attraction, torque and susceptibility artifact for Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid (BAHA) implant at 1.5 T and 3.0 T MRI by standard criteria. In vitro assessment tools were made of acrylic-resin by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) F2052-06 and F2119-07 standard. Translational attraction of BAHA implant was measured by the maximum deflection angle at 96 cm position, where the magnetically induced deflection was the greatest. The torque was assessed by the qualitative criteria of evaluating the alignment and rotation pattern, when the BAHA implant was positioned on a line with $45^{\circ}$ intervals inside the circular container in the center of the bore. The susceptibility artifact images were obtained using the hanged test tool, which was filled with $CuSO_4$ solution. And then the artifact size was measured using Susceptibility A rtifact Measurement (SA M) software. In results, the translational attraction was 0 mm at both 1.5 T and 3.0 T and the torque was 0(no torque) at 1.5 T, and +1(mild torque) at 3.0 T. The size of susceptibility artifacts was between 13.20 mm and 38.91 mm. Therefore, The BAHA implant was safe for the patient in clinical MR environment.
Keywords
Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid implant; safety; Susceptibility artifact; Translational attraction; Torque;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Shellock F.G., Crues J.V.: Hight-field strength MR imaging and metallic biomedical implants: an ex vivo evaluation of deflection forces, American Journal of Radiology, 151(2), 389-392, 1988
2 Shellock F.G., Morisoli S.M.: Ex vivo evaluation of ferromagnetism and artifacts of cardiac occluders exposed to a 1.5T MR system, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 4(2), 213-215, 1994   DOI
3 Shellock F.G., Morisoli S.M.: Ex vivo evaluation of ferromagnetism, heating, and artifacts for heart valve prostheses exposed to a 1.5 Tesla MR system, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 4(5), 756-758, 1994   DOI
4 Syms M.J., Peterman G.W.: Vibratory sample magnetometry of middle ear prostheses and manufacturing materials, Otology & Neurotology, 22(4), 487-491, 2001   DOI
5 Fritsch M.H., Naumann I.C., Mosier K.M.: BAHA Devices and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scanners, Otology & neurotology, 29(8), 1095-1099, 2008   DOI
6 Snik F.M., Mylanus E.A., Proops D.W., Wolfaardt J.F., Hodgetts W.E., Somers T., TTellstrTm A.: Consensus statements on the BAHA system: where do we stand at present?. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, 114(12_suppl), 2-12, 2005
7 Shellock F.G., Schatz C.J.: Metallic otologic implants: in vitro assessment of ferromagnetism at 1.5T, American Journal of NeuroRadiology, 12(2), 279-281, 1991
8 Arndt S., Kromeier J., Berlis A., Maier W., Laszig R., Aschendorff A.: Imaging procedures after bone-anchored hearing aid implantation, Laryngoscope, 117(10), 1815-1818, 2007   DOI
9 ASTM F2052-06: Standard test method for measurement of magnetically induced displancement force on medical devices in the magnetic resonance environment, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, 2006
10 ASTM F2119-07: Standard test method for evaluation of MR image artifacts from passive implants, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, 2006
11 Shellock F.G.: Biomedical implants and devices: Assessment of magnetic field interactions with a 3.0-Tesla MR system, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 16(6), 721-732, 2002   DOI
12 GTrgTlT S., Ayyildiz S., Kamburoglu K., GTkTe S., Ozen T.: Effect of orthodontic brackets and different wires on radiofrequency heating and magnetic field interactions during 3-T MRI, Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, 43(2), 20130356, 2014   DOI
13 Shellock F.G., Valencerina S.: In vitro evaluation of MR imaging issues at 3T for aneurysm clips made from MP35N: findings and information applied to 155 additional aneurysm clips, American Journal of Neuroradiology, 31(4), 615-619, 2010   DOI
14 Guttler F., Heinrich A., TeichgrTber U.: Software development for the determination of susceptibility artefacts in MRI after ASTM F2119, Biomedical Engineering/Biomedizinische Technik, 57(SI-1 Track-B), 480-480, 2012
15 ASTM F2052: Standard test method for measurement of magnetically in-duced displacement force on passive implants in the magnetic resonance environment, In: Annual book of ASTM standards, 13.01, West Conshohocken
16 Olsrud J., LTtt J., Brockstedt S., Romner B., BTTrkman-Burtscher I.M.: Magnetic resonance imaging artifacts caused by aneurysm clips and shunt valves: dependence on field strength (1.5 and 3 T) and imaging parameters. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 22(3), 433-437, 2005   DOI
17 Port J.D., Pomper M.G.: Quantification and minimization of magnetic susceptibility artifacts on GRE images. Journal of computer assisted tomography, 24(6), 958-964, 2000   DOI
18 Bartels L.W., Bakker C.J., Viergever M.A.: Improved lumen visualization in metallic vascular implants by reducing RF artifacts. Magnetic resonance in medicine, 47(1), 171-180, 2002   DOI
19 Shellock FG, Crues JV: MR Procedures: Biologic Effects, Safety, and Patient Care 1, Radiology, 232(3), 635-652, 2004   DOI