Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39602889›Full record

ArticleStereotactic and functional neurosurgery2025

Phantom Safety Assessment of 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Directional and Sensing Deep Brain Stimulation Devices.

Riccardo Ludovichetti, Clement T Chow, Sriranga Kashyap, Ian Connell, Benson Yang, Simon J Graham, Gavin Elias, Brendan Santyr, Asma Naheed, Diego Martinez and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Riccardo LudovichettiJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, riccardoludo@gmail.com.
Clement T ChowDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sriranga KashyapKrembil Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ian ConnellDepartment of Medical Biophysics, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Benson YangPhysical Sciences Platform, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Simon J GrahamDepartment of Medical Biophysics, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Gavin EliasDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Brendan SantyrDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Asma NaheedJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Diego MartinezDepartment of Medical Biophysics, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Michael ColditzDepartment of Neurosurgery, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Jürgen GermannDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Artur VetkasDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Kâmil UludağKrembil Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andres M LozanoDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Alexandre BoutetJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is both a crucial clinical and research tool for patients with deep brain stimulation (DBS) devices. However, safety concerns predominantly related to device heating have limited such imaging. Rigorous safety testing has demonstrated that scanning outside of vendor guidelines may be both safe and feasible, unlocking unique opportunities for advanced imaging in this patient population. Currently, however, 3T MRI safety data including advanced MRI sequences in novel directional and sensing DBS devices is lacking.

methodsAn anthropomorphic phantom replicating bilateral DBS system was used to assess the temperature rise at the electrode tips, implantable pulse generator, and cranial loop during acquisition of routine clinical sequences (three dimensional [3D] T1, GRE T2*, T2 FSE) and advanced imaging sequences including functional MRI (fMRI), arterial spin labelling (ASL), and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). Measures of radiofrequency exposure (specific absorption rate [SAR] and root-mean square value of the MRI effective component of the radiofrequency transmission field [B1+rms]) were also recorded as an indirect measure of heating. Testing involved both a new directional and sensing DBS device (Medtronic: B30015 leads and Percept PC neurostimulator) and a previous-generation DBS device (Medtronic: 3,387 leads and Percept PC neurostimulator) in combination with a state-of-the-art (Siemens MAGNETOM Prisma) and a previous-generation (GE Signa HDxt) 3T MRI scanner.

resultsOn the state-of-the-art 3T MRI scanner, the new DBS device produced safe temperature rises with clinically used sequences and fMRI but not with other advanced sequences such as DWI and ASL, which also exceeded B1+rms vendor guidelines (i.e., ≤2 μT). When scanned on the previous MRI scanner, the recent DBS device produced overall lower and slower temperature rises compared to the previous DBS model. Among the sequences performed on this scanner, several (3D T1, DWI, T2 FSE, and ASL) exceeded the approved SAR vendor limit (<1 W/kg), but only ASL resulted in an unacceptable temperature rise during scanning of the previous DBS model.

conclusionThese phantom safety data show that both clinically used MRI sequences and research sequences such as fMRI can be successfully acquired on 3T MRI scanners with a novel directional and sensing DBS model. As several of these sequences were obtained outside regulatory-approved vendor guidelines, preemptive safety testing should be done. As directional leads become increasingly common, improving MRI safety knowledge is crucial to expand clinical and research possibilities.

introductionMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is both a crucial clinical and research tool for patients with deep brain stimulation (DBS) devices. However, safety concerns predominantly related to device heating have limited such imaging. Rigorous safety testing has demonstrated that scanning outside of vendor guidelines may be both safe and feasible, unlocking unique opportunities for advanced imaging in this patient population. Currently, however, 3T MRI safety data including advanced MRI sequences in novel directional and sensing DBS devices is lacking.

methodsAn anthropomorphic phantom replicating bilateral DBS system was used to assess the temperature rise at the electrode tips, implantable pulse generator, and cranial loop during acquisition of routine clinical sequences (three dimensional [3D] T1, GRE T2*, T2 FSE) and advanced imaging sequences including functional MRI (fMRI), arterial spin labelling (ASL), and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). Measures of radiofrequency exposure (specific absorption rate [SAR] and root-mean square value of the MRI effective component of the radiofrequency transmission field [B1+rms]) were also recorded as an indirect measure of heating. Testing involved both a new directional and sensing DBS device (Medtronic: B30015 leads and Percept PC neurostimulator) and a previous-generation DBS device (Medtronic: 3,387 leads and Percept PC neurostimulator) in combination with a state-of-the-art (Siemens MAGNETOM Prisma) and a previous-generation (GE Signa HDxt) 3T MRI scanner.

resultsOn the state-of-the-art 3T MRI scanner, the new DBS device produced safe temperature rises with clinically used sequences and fMRI but not with other advanced sequences such as DWI and ASL, which also exceeded B1+rms vendor guidelines (i.e., ≤2 μT). When scanned on the previous MRI scanner, the recent DBS device produced overall lower and slower temperature rises compared to the previous DBS model. Among the sequences performed on this scanner, several (3D T1, DWI, T2 FSE, and ASL) exceeded the approved SAR vendor limit (<1 W/kg), but only ASL resulted in an unacceptable temperature rise during scanning of the previous DBS model.

conclusionThese phantom safety data show that both clinically used MRI sequences and research sequences such as fMRI can be successfully acquired on 3T MRI scanners with a novel directional and sensing DBS model. As several of these sequences were obtained outside regulatory-approved vendor guidelines, preemptive safety testing should be done. As directional leads become increasingly common, improving MRI safety knowledge is crucial to expand clinical and research possibilities.

Indexed as

Deep Brain StimulationMagnetic Resonance ImagingPhantoms, ImagingBrainElectrodes, ImplantedEquipment SafetyHumansDeep brain stimulationFunctional imagingFunctional MRIMagnetic resonance imagingSafety testing

Identifiers

PMID39602889
PMCPMC11797914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.