Safety assessment of spine MRI in deep brain stimulation patients

Restricted access

OBJECTIVE

Many centers are hesitant to perform clinically indicated MRI in patients who have undergone deep brain stimulation (DBS). Highly restrictive guidelines prohibit the use of most routine clinical MRI protocols in these patients. The authors’ goals were to assess the safety of spine MRI in patients with implanted DBS devices, first through phantom model testing and subsequently through validation in a DBS patient cohort.

METHODS

A phantom was used to assess DBS device heating during 1.5-T spine MRI. To establish a safe spine protocol, routinely used clinical sequences deemed unsafe (a rise in temperature > 2°C) were modified to decrease the rise in temperature. This safe phantom-based protocol was then used to prospectively run 67 spine MRI sequences in 9 DBS participants requiring clinical imaging. The primary outcome was acute adverse effects; secondary outcomes included long-term adverse clinical effects, acute findings on brain MRI, and device impedance stability.

RESULTS

The increases in temperature were highest when scanning the cervical spine and lowest when scanning the lumbar spine. A temperature rise < 2°C was achieved when 3D sequences were modified to 2D and when the number of slices was decreased by the minimum amount compared to routine spine MRI protocols (but there were still more slices than allowed by vendor guidelines). Following spine MRI, no acute or long-term adverse effects or acute findings on brain MR images were detected. Device impedances remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with DBS devices may safely undergo spine MRI with a fewer number of slices compared to those used in routine clinical protocols. Safety data acquisition may allow protocols outside vendor guidelines with a maximized number of slices, reducing the need for radiologist supervision.

Clinical trial registration no.: NCT03753945 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

ABBREVIATIONS B1+rms = root-mean-square value of the MRI effective component of the radiofrequency magnetic (B1) field; C-spine = cervical spine; DBS = deep brain stimulation; IPG = implantable pulse generator; L-spine = lumbar spine; PD = Parkinson’s disease; RF = radiofrequency; SAR = specific absorption rate; T-spine = thoracic spine; T1W = T1-weighted; T2W = T2-weighted.
Article Information

Contributor Notes

Correspondence Andres M. Lozano: Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. lozano@uhnresearch.ca.INCLUDE WHEN CITING Published online February 14, 2020; DOI: 10.3171/2019.12.SPINE191241.Disclosures This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG NE 2276/1-1) with funding to C.N., the RR Tasker Chair in Functional Neurosurgery at University Health Network, and a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Neuroscience. A.B. was responsible for the data analysis. The corresponding author confirms that he had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.I.H. is a National Institutes of Health (NIH) employee. The opinions expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not reflect the views of the NIH, the Department of Health and Human Services, or the United States government. B.L. is now a Medtronic employee; he was not at the time of the completion of this work. Medtronic had no role in data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation. A.F. reports grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Abbvie and Medtronic; grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific; personal fees from Sunovion, Chiesi farmaceutici, and UCB; and grants and personal fees from Ipsen, outside the submitted work. S.K.K. reports an honorarium and consulting fees from Medtronic. A.M.L. serves as a consultant for Medtronic, Abbott, Boston Scientific, St. Jude, and Functional Neuromodulation.
Headings
References
  • 1

    Allison JYanasak N: What MRI sequences produce the highest specific absorption rate (SAR), and is there something we should be doing to reduce the SAR during standard examinations? AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:W1402015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    ASTM International: ASTM F2052-15: Standard Test Method for Measurement of Magnetically Induced Displacement Force on Medical Devices in the Magnetic Resonance Environment. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International2015 (https://www.astm.org/Standards/F2052.htm) [Accessed January 3 2020]

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Baker KBTkach JANyenhuis JAPhillips MShellock FGGonzalez-Martinez J: Evaluation of specific absorption rate as a dosimeter of MRI-related implant heating. J Magn Reson Imaging 20:3153202004

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Baker KBTkach JAPhillips MDRezai AR: Variability in RF-induced heating of a deep brain stimulation implant across MR systems. J Magn Reson Imaging 24:123612422006

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Boston Scientific: ImageReady MRI Guidelines for Boston Scientific Deep Brain Stimulation Systems. Marlborough, MA: Boston Scientific2017

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Boutet AHancu ISaha UCrawley AXu DSRanjan M: 3-Tesla MRI of deep brain stimulation patients: safety assessment of coils and pulse sequences. J Neurosurg 132:5865942020

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Boutet ARashid THancu IElias GJBGramer RMGermann J: Functional MRI safety and artifacts during deep brain stimulation: experience in 102 patients. Radiology 293:1741832019

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Calcagnini GTriventi MCensi FMattei EBartolini PKainz W: In vitro investigation of pacemaker lead heating induced by magnetic resonance imaging: role of implant geometry. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:8798862008

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Deli GBalas INagy FBalazs EJanszky JKomoly S: Comparison of the efficacy of unipolar and bipolar electrode configuration during subthalamic deep brain stimulation. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 17:50–542011

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Falowski SSafriel YRyan MPHargens L: The rate of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with deep brain stimulation. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 94:1471532016

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Georgi JCStippich CTronnier VMHeiland S: Active deep brain stimulation during MRI: a feasibility study. Magn Reson Med 51:3803882004

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Gupte AAShrivastava DSpaniol MAAbosch A: MRI-related heating near deep brain stimulation electrodes: more data are needed. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 89:1311402011

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Hancu IBoutet AFiveland ERanjan MPrusik JDimarzio M: On the (non-)equivalency of monopolar and bipolar settings for deep brain stimulation fMRI studies of Parkinson’s disease patients. J Magn Reson Imaging 49:173617492019

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Hariz M: My 25 stimulating years with DBS in Parkinson’s disease. J Parkinsons Dis 7 (s1):S33S412017

  • 15

    Henderson JMTkach JPhillips MBaker KShellock FGRezai AR: Permanent neurological deficit related to magnetic resonance imaging in a patient with implanted deep brain stimulation electrodes for Parkinson’s disease: case report. Neurosurgery 57:E10632005

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    International Organization for Standardization: ISO/TS 10974:2018(E): Assessment of the Safety of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Patients With an Active Implantable Medical Device. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization2018

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Kahan JPapadaki AWhite MMancini LYousry TZrinzo L: The safety of using body-transmit MRI in patients with implanted deep brain stimulation devices. PLoS One 10:e01290772015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Kainz W: MR heating tests of MR critical implants. J Magn Reson Imaging 26:4504512007

  • 19

    Kainz WNeubauer GUberbacher RAlesch FChan DD: Temperature measurement on neurological pulse generators during MR scans. Biomed Eng Online 1:22002

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Larson PSRichardson RMStarr PAMartin AJ: Magnetic resonance imaging of implanted deep brain stimulators: experience in a large series. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 86:921002008

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Lozano AMLipsman NBergman HBrown PChabardes SChang JW: Deep brain stimulation: current challenges and future directions. Nat Rev Neurol 15:1481602019

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Martin AJ: MRI in patients with deep brain stimulation electrodes: balancing risks and benefits. Radiology 293:1841852019

  • 23

    Medtronic: MRI Guidelines for Medtronic Deep Brain Stimulation Systems. Minneapolis: Medtronic2015 (http://www.mriquestions.com/uploads/3/4/5/7/34572113/dbs_medtronics_contrib_228155.pdf) [Accessed January 3 2020]

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Ozdoba CGralla JRieke ABinggeli RSchroth G: Myelography in the age of MRI: why we do it, and how we do it. Radiol Res Pract 2011:3290172011

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    Pötter MHerzog JSiebner HRKopper FSteigerwald FDeuschl G: Subthalamic nucleus stimulation modulates audiospinal reactions in Parkinson disease. Neurology 70:144514512008

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Sammartino FKrishna VSankar TFisico JKalia SKHodaie M: 3-Tesla MRI in patients with fully implanted deep brain stimulation devices: a preliminary study in 10 patients. J Neurosurg 127:8928982017

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Sandow BADonnal JF: Myelography complications and current practice patterns. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:7687712005

  • 28

    Schmitz BLAschoff AJHoffmann MHGrön G: Advantages and pitfalls in 3T MR brain imaging: a pictorial review. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 26:222922372005

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Shrivastava DAbosch AHanson TTian JGupte AIaizzo PA: Effect of the extracranial deep brain stimulation lead on radiofrequency heating at 9.4 Tesla (400.2 MHz). J Magn Reson Imaging 32:6006072010

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Shrivastava DAbosch AHughes JGoerke UDelaBarre LVisaria R: Heating induced near deep brain stimulation lead electrodes during magnetic resonance imaging with a 3 T transceive volume head coil. Phys Med Biol 57:565156652012

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Spiegel JFuss GBackens MReith WMagnus TBecker G: Transient dystonia following magnetic resonance imaging in a patient with deep brain stimulation electrodes for the treatment of Parkinson disease. Case report. J Neurosurg 99:7727742003

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32

    St. Jude Medical: MRI Procedure Information for St. Jude Medical MR Conditional Deep Brain Stimulation Systems. Little Canada, MN: St. Jude Medical2018 (https://manuals.sjm.com/Search-Form?re=North-America&cc=US&ln=all&qry=SJM+ring+&ipp=10&Page=1) [Accessed January 3 2020]

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33

    Tagliati MJankovic JPagan FSusatia FIsaias IUOkun MS: Safety of MRI in patients with implanted deep brain stimulation devices. Neuroimage 47 (Suppl 2):T53T572009

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34

    Yeo DTWang ZLoew WVogel MWHancu I: Local specific absorption rate in high-pass birdcage and transverse electromagnetic body coils for multiple human body models in clinical landmark positions at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 33:120912172011

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35

    Zrinzo LYoshida FHariz MIThornton JFoltynie TYousry TA: Clinical safety of brain magnetic resonance imaging with implanted deep brain stimulation hardware: large case series and review of the literature. World Neurosurg 76:164–17269732011

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
TrendMD
Metrics

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 182 182 182
Full Text Views 29 29 29
PDF Downloads 17 17 17
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0
PubMed
Google Scholar