ReviewNeuroradiology2021
Clinical safety of intracranial EEG electrodes in MRI at 1.5 T and 3 T: a single-center experience and literature review.
Review in Neuroradiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety of intracranial electrodes in an MRI environment: a technical report.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2024Article
- Physical behavior of PEDOT polymer electrode during magnetic resonance imaging and long-term test in the climate chamber.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Intraoperative MR Imaging during Glioma Resection.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIntracranial electroencephalography (EEG) can be a critical part of presurgical evaluation for drug resistant epilepsy. With the increasing use of intracranial EEG, the safety of these electrodes in the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) environment remains a concern, particularly at higher field strengths. However, no studies have reported the MRI safety experience of intracranial electrodes at 3 T. We report an MRI safety review of patients with intracranial electrodes at 1.5 and 3 T.
methodsOne hundred and sixty-five consecutive admissions for intracranial EEG monitoring were reviewed. A total of 184 MRI scans were performed on 135 patients over 140 admissions. These included 118 structural MRI studies at 1.5 T and 66 functional MRI studies at 3 T. The magnetic resonance (MR) protocols avoided the use of high specific energy absorption rate sequences that could result in electrode heating. The intracranial implantations included 114 depth, 15 subdural, and 11 combined subdural and depth electrodes. Medical records were reviewed for patient-reported complications and radiologic complications related to these studies. Pre-implantation, post-implantation, and post-explantation imaging studies were reviewed for potential complications.
resultsNo adverse events or complications were seen during or after MRI scanning at 1.5 or 3 T apart from those attributed to electrode implantation. There was also no clinical or imaging evidence of worsening of pre-existing implantation-related complications after MR imaging.
conclusionNo clinical or radiographic complications are seen when performing MRI scans at 1.5 or 3 T on patients with implanted intracranial EEG electrodes while avoiding high specific energy absorption rate sequences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.