Functional MRI Safety and Artifacts during Deep Brain Stimulation: Experience in 102 Patients

被引:52
|
作者
Boutet, Alexandre [1 ,2 ]
Rashid, Tanweer [3 ]
Hancu, Ileana [4 ]
Elias, Gavin J. B. [2 ]
Gramer, Robert M. [2 ]
Germann, Jurgen [2 ]
Dimarzio, Marisa [3 ]
Li, Bryan [2 ]
Paramanandam, Vijayashankar [2 ,4 ]
Prasad, Sreeram [2 ,4 ]
Ranjan, Manish [2 ]
Coblentz, Ailish [1 ,2 ]
Gwun, Dave [2 ]
Chow, Clement T. [2 ]
Maciel, Ricardo [2 ,4 ]
Soh, Derrick [2 ,4 ]
Fiveland, Eric [2 ,5 ]
Hodaie, Mojgan [2 ]
Kalia, Suneil K. [2 ]
Fasano, Alfonso [2 ,4 ]
Kucharczyk, Walter [1 ]
Pilitsis, Julie [3 ,6 ]
Lozano, Andres M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Dept Med Imaging, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Hlth Network, Toronto Western Hosp, Div Neurosurg, 399 Bathurst St, Toronto, ON M5T 2S8, Canada
[3] Albany Med Coll, Dept Neurosci & Expt Therapeut, Albany, NY 12208 USA
[4] Univ Toronto, Toronto Western Hosp, UHN,Div Neurol, Edmond J Safra Program Parkinsons Dis Morton & Gl, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] Krembil Brain Inst, GE Global Res Ctr Niskayuna, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] Albany Med Ctr, Dept Neurosurg, Albany, NY USA
关键词
SUSCEPTIBILITY ARTIFACTS; SUBTHALAMIC NUCLEUS; PARKINSON-DISEASE; FIELD-STRENGTH; IN-VITRO; SYSTEMS; IMPLANT; DBS;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2019190546
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Background: With growing numbers of patients receiving deep brain stimulation (DBS), radiologists are encountering these neuro-modulation devices at an increasing rate. Current MRI safety guidelines, however, limit MRI access in these patients. Purpose: To describe an MRI (1.5 T and 3 T) experience and safety profile in a large cohort of participants with active DBS systems and characterize the hardware-related artifacts on images from functional MRI. Materials and Methods: In this prospective study, study participants receiving active DBS underwent 1.5- or 3-T MRI (T1-weighted imaging and gradient-recalled echo [GRE]-echo-planar imaging [EPI]) between June 2017 and October 2018. Short- and long-term adverse events were tracked. The authors quantified DBS hardware-related artifacts on images from GRE-EPI (functional MRI) at the cranial coil wire and electrode contacts. Segmented artifacts were then transformed into standard space to define the brain areas affected by signal loss. Two-sample t tests were used to assess the difference in artifact size between 1.5- and 3-T MRI. Results: A total of 102 participants (mean age +/- standard deviation, 60 years +/- 11; 65 men) were evaluated. No MRI-related short- and long-term adverse events or acute changes were observed. DBS artifacts were most prominent near the electrode contacts and over the frontoparietal cortical area where the redundancy of the extension wire is placed subcutaneously. The mean electrode contact artifact diameter was 9.3 mm +/- 1.6, and 1.9% +/- 0.8 of the brain was obscured by the coil artifact. The coil artifacts were larger at 3 T than at 1.5 T, obscuring 2.1% +/- 0.7 and 1.4% +/- 0.7 of intracranial volume, respectively (P < .001). The superficial frontoparietal cortex and deep structures neighboring the electrode contacts were most commonly obscured. Conclusion: With a priori local safety testing, patients receiving deep brain stimulation may safely undergo 1.5- and 3-T MRI. Deep brain stimulation hardware-related artifacts only affect a small proportion of the brain. (C) RSNA, 2019
引用
收藏
页码:174 / 183
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Safety in the Use of Dexmedetomidine (Precedex) for Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery: Our Experience in 23 Randomized Patients
    Sassi, Marco
    Zekaj, Edvin
    Grotta, Alessandra
    Pollini, Alberto
    Pellanda, Armando
    Borroni, Massimo
    Pacchetti, Claudio
    Menghetti, Claudia
    Porta, Mauro
    Servello, Domenico
    NEUROMODULATION, 2013, 16 (05): : 401 - 406
  • [22] Clinical experience with vagus nerve stimulation and deep brain stimulation in epileptic patients
    Boon, Paul
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, 2008, 15 : 2 - 3
  • [23] Functional Patients Referred for Deep Brain Stimulation: How Common Is it?
    Gorodetsky, Carolina
    Azevedo, Paula
    Fasano, Alfonso
    MOVEMENT DISORDERS CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2022, 9 (06): : 841 - 842
  • [24] MRI in Patients with Deep Brain Stimulation Electrodes: Balancing Risks and Benefits
    Martin, Alastair J.
    RADIOLOGY, 2019, 293 (01) : 184 - 185
  • [25] Deep brain stimulation, the Irish experience
    Mulroy, E.
    Roberts, K.
    Cummins, G.
    Magennis, B.
    Lynch, T.
    MOVEMENT DISORDERS, 2011, 26 : S78 - S79
  • [26] Perioperative events during deep brain stimulation: The experience at Cleveland Clinic
    Khatib, Reem
    Ebrahim, Zeyd
    Rezai, Ali
    Cata, Juan P.
    Boulis, Nicolas M.
    Doyle, D. John
    Schurigyn, Tamara
    Farag, Ehab
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGICAL ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2008, 20 (01) : 36 - 40
  • [27] Deep brain stimulation as a functional scalpel
    Broggi, G.
    Franzini, A.
    Tringali, G.
    Ferroli, P.
    Marras, C.
    Romito, L.
    Maccagnano, E.
    ADVANCES IN FUNCTIONAL AND REPARATIVE NEUROSURGERY, 2006, 99 : 13 - 19
  • [28] Safety in the Use of Dexmedetomidine (Precedex) for Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery: Our Experience in 23 Randomized Patients COMMENTS
    Deogaonkar, Milind
    Liker, Mark
    Lad, Shivanand
    NEUROMODULATION, 2013, 16 (05): : 406 - 406
  • [29] Co-registration of stereotactic MRI and isofieldlines during deep brain stimulation
    Hemm, S
    Mennessier, G
    Vayssière, N
    Cif, L
    Coubes, P
    BRAIN RESEARCH BULLETIN, 2005, 68 (1-2) : 59 - 61
  • [30] Deep brain stimulation and intraoperative MRI Response
    Cui, Zhiqiang
    Ling, Zhipei
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2016, 124 (01) : 60 - 61