Premium
Magnetic resonance safety testing of a newly‐developed fiber‐optic cardiac pacing lead
Author(s) -
Greatbatch Wilson,
Miller Victor,
Shellock Frank G.
Publication year - 2002
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.10129
Subject(s) - lead (geology) , magnetic resonance imaging , optical fiber , medicine , materials science , radiology , optics , physics , geology , geomorphology
Purpose To assess magnetic resonance (MR) safety for a newly developed, fiber‐optic cardiac pacing lead. Materials and Methods MR safety was assessed for the fiber‐optic cardiac pacing lead by evaluating magnetic field interactions and heating. Translational attraction and torque were evaluated using a 1.5‐Tesla MR system and previously described, standardized techniques. MR imaging‐related heating was assessed using a 1.5‐Tesla MR system and a transmit/receive, body radiofrequency (RF) coil with the fiber‐optic lead positioned to simulate an in vivo condition in a saline‐filled phantom. The phantom had dimensions similar to a human subject's torso and head. A fluoroptic thermometry system was used to record temperatures on and near the electrodes of the fiber‐optic pacing lead at five‐second intervals immediately before and during 20 minutes of MR imaging performed at a whole‐body‐averaged specific absorption rate (SAR) of 1.5 W/kg. Temperatures were also recorded from a reference site during this experiment. Results Magnetic field interactions for the fiber‐optic lead were minimal (deflection angle, 23°; torque, +2). The highest temperature change recorded for the fiber‐optic cardiac pacing lead and reference site was +0.8°C. Conclusion The minor magnetic field interactions and relative lack of heating for the fiber‐optic pacing lead indicate that it should be safe for patients with this device to undergo MR imaging procedures using MR systems operating at 1.5‐T or less and at a whole‐body‐averaged SARs up to 1.5 W/kg. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2002;16:97–103. © 2002 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.