Premium
Lack of mutagenic and co‐mutagenic effects of magnetic fields during magnetic resonance imaging
Author(s) -
Schreiber Wolfgang G.,
Teichmann Elke M.,
Schiffer Ilka,
Hast Jochem,
Akbari Wahida,
Georgi Hildegart,
Graf Robert,
Hehn Michael,
Spieβ Hans W.,
Thelen Manfred,
Oesch Franz,
Hengstler Jan G.
Publication year - 2001
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.10010
Subject(s) - ames test , magnetic resonance imaging , magnetic field , nuclear magnetic resonance , magnetostatics , pyrene , chemistry , salmonella , bacteria , biology , medicine , physics , genetics , organic chemistry , quantum mechanics , radiology
Mutagenic and co‐mutagenic effects of static, pulsed bipolar gradient, and high‐frequency magnetic fields, as well as combinations of them, were examined using the Ames test. The Ames test using Salmonella typhimurium bacteria, wild‐type strain RTA, preincubation assay, without metabolic activation, was performed. All combinations of magnetic fields were tested with and without co‐exposure to N‐methyl‐N′‐nitro‐N‐nitrosoguanidine and benzo[ a ]pyrene‐4,5‐oxide, ethylene oxide, carboplatin, or cisplatin. As expected, chemical mutagens caused a clear‐cut increase of the revertants in the Ames test. However, neither the static fields nor a combination of a static magnetic field with the time‐varying bipolar gradient field or a pulsed high‐frequency magnetic field caused an alteration in the number of revertants in the Ames test. No co‐mutagenic effect of any magnetic field combination was observed. In conclusion, magnetic fields used during clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were neither mutagenic nor co‐mutagenic. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2001;14:779–788. © 2001 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.