Cardiac pacemakers, ICDs, and loop recorder: evaluation of translational attraction using conventional ("long-bore") and "short-bore" 1.5- and 3.0-Tesla MR systems.

PURPOSE To evaluate magnet-related translational attraction for cardiac pacemakers, ICDs, and an insertable loop recorder in association with exposure to "long-bore" and "short-bore" 1.5- and 3.0-Tesla MR systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS Fourteen cardiac pacemakers, four ICDs, and one insertable loop recorder were evaluated for translational attraction using deflection angle tests performed at the points of the highest spatial gradients for long-bore and short-bore 1.5- and 3.0-Tesla MR systems according to ASTM guidelines. RESULTS Deflection angles ranged from 9-90 degrees for the long-bore and from 11-90 degrees for the short-bore 1.5-T MR system. Deflection angles ranged from 23-90 degrees for the long-bore and from 34-90 degrees for the short-bore 3.0-T MR system. Three of the cardiovascular implants exhibited deflection angles > or = 45 degrees (i.e., indicating that they are potentially unsafe for patients) on the long-bore and short-bore 1.5-T MR systems. Eight implants exhibited deflection angles > or = 45 degrees on the long-bore 3.0-T MR system, while 14 exhibited deflection angles > or = 45 degrees on the short-bore 3.0-T MR system. In general, deflection angles for these cardiovascular implants were significantly (p < 0.01) higher on 1.5- and 3.0-Tesla short-bore compared to the long-bore MR systems. CONCLUSIONS Several of the cardiovascular implants that underwent evaluation may be problematic for patients undergoing MR procedures using 1.5- and 3.0-T MR systems because of risks associated with magnet-related movements. Obviously, additional MR safety issues must also be considered for these implants.

[1]  Jean A. Tkach,et al.  Aneurysm clips: evaluation of magnetic field interactions and translational attraction by use of "long-bore" and "short-bore" 3.0-T MR imaging systems. , 2003, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[2]  D L Hayes,et al.  Effect of 1.5 tesla nuclear magnetic resonance imaging scanner on implanted permanent pacemakers. , 1987, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  K. Seelos,et al.  Effects of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Cardiac Pacemakers , 1995, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[4]  F. Shellock,et al.  Cardiovascular catheters and accessories: Ex vivo testing of ferromagnetism, heating, and artifacts associated with MRI , 1998, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[5]  F G Shellock,et al.  Prosthetic heart valves and annuloplasty rings: assessment of magnetic field interactions, heating, and artifacts at 1.5 Tesla. , 2001, Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.

[6]  J. Gallagher,et al.  The effects of nuclear magnetic resonance on patients with cardiac pacemakers , 1984 .

[7]  J. H. Gallagher,et al.  The effects of nuclear magnetic resonance on patients with cardiac pacemakers. , 1983, Radiology.

[8]  M. L. Wood,et al.  Magnetic Resonance Procedures: Health Effects and Safety , 2001 .

[9]  D. H. Liebenberg Optical Standards And The American Society For Testing And Materials (ASTM) , 1980, Other Conferences.

[10]  F G Shellock,et al.  High-field-strength MR imaging and metallic biomedical implants: an ex vivo evaluation of deflection forces. , 1988, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  B L Wilkoff,et al.  Safe Performance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Five Patients with Permanent Cardiac Pacemakers , 1996, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[12]  F. Shellock Pocket Guide to MR Procedures and Metallic Objects: Update 2001 , 2000 .

[13]  D L Hayes,et al.  The Effects of Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Implantable Pulse Generators , 1986, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[14]  P Boesiger,et al.  Force and Torque Effects of a 1.5‐Tesla MRI Scanner on Cardiac Pacemakers and ICDs , 2001, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[15]  J Gieseke,et al.  MR imaging and cardiac pacemakers: in-vitro evaluation and in-vivo studies in 51 patients at 0.5 T. , 2000, Radiology.

[16]  B Lüderitz,et al.  Interference with Cardiac Pacemakers by Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Are There Irreversible Changes at 0.5 Tesla? , 2001, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[17]  D L Hayes,et al.  The Effects of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imagers on External and Implantable Pulse Generators , 1984, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[18]  R. Luechinger,et al.  MR imaging in patients with cardiac pacemakers. , 2001, Radiology.

[19]  P T Cahill,et al.  Effect of magnetic resonance imaging on DDD pacemakers. , 1986, The American journal of cardiology.

[20]  K Bachmann,et al.  Effects of magnetic resonance imaging on cardiac pacemakers and electrodes. , 1997, American heart journal.

[21]  F G Shellock,et al.  Prosthetic heart valves: Evaluation of magnetic field interactions, heating, and artifacts at 1.5 T , 2000, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[22]  Guk-Rwang Won American Society for Testing and Materials , 1987 .

[23]  C G Peterfy,et al.  MR imaging. , 1996, Bailliere's clinical rheumatology.

[24]  John Schenck Health Effects and Safety of Static Magnetic Fields , 2000 .