Modelling the RF safety of tattoo pigment ink for subjects undergoing 7 Tesla MRI
Hongbae Jeong1, Aaron Hess2, and Peter Jezzard1

1FMRIB Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

Synopsis

Despite many reports of skin burns in the region of tattoos, there are few safety studies concerning RF heating caused by tattoos. Manufacturers of tattoo ink are numerous and use a range of dye ingredients, making it difficult to assess the electromagnetic properties of each ink pigment. An anchor-shaped tattoo was modelled 1mm under the skin layer in the region of the cervical spine to predict a possible skin burn generated by RF coil. A simulation model of RF heating in tattoo pigment is proposed, which shows that certain tattoo pigments may lead to severe skin burns when performing high field MRI.

Purpose

In this study, we investigated the RF heating effects of iron oxide, especially Fe3O4, using electromagnetic and thermal simulation software.

Introduction

Electromagnetic simulation of specific absorption rate (SAR) and temperature elevation in subjects scanned with MRI have been studied for many years, with previous introduction of a ‘cumulative equivalent minutes at 43°C’ (CEM43) tissue damage threshold to ensure MR safety1. Despite many reports of skin burns in the region of tattoos, there are few safety studies concerning RF heating caused by tattoos2-4. Manufacturers of tattoo ink are numerous and all use a range of dye ingredients, making it difficult to assess the electromagnetic properties of each specific ink pigment. Nevertheless, the possible cause of a skin burn during an MR scan has been reported to be related to iron oxide, which is potentially magnetic and an electrical conductor3. Iron oxide exists in different chemical states: Fe3O4 is a known ingredient of black ink pigment, along with Fe2O3 and FeO for red and yellow, respectively5.

Methods

SEMCAD X (Speag, Switzerland) was used to calculate SAR, CEM43 values, and to solve the Arrhenius model for thermal change. A single loop surface coil was modelled with four equally spaced capacitors and with a diameter of 100 mm and a width of 10mm. The coil was positioned 5 cm away from the Duke human model6 with a resolution of (1mm)3 and tuned for 7 T (S11 < -25 dB) (Fig. 1). An anchor-shaped tattoo was modelled 1mm under the skin layer in the region of the cervical spine using iSEG (ZMT, Switzerland) with longitudinal and lateral lengths of 150 mm and 100 mm, respectively. The model in the region of the tattoo shape was adjusted until a single layer of tattoo pigment was located 1 mm under the outmost skin layer in the 3D slices. The maximum local SAR for normal skin was calculated for a standard permitted thermal simulation input power (10gSARmax=9.8 W/kg at 43 W input power). The dielectric properties of black tattoo ink pigment have not been reported, so the concentration of Fe in black tattoo pigment7 was used to estimate its dielectric properties (σ: 1275.2 S/m, εr: 74.41 in Fig. 2). The thermal properties of tattoo ink pigment were assigned from previous studies8. To estimate the skin burn effect, the Arrhenius model was used and its parameters for skin were assigned from literature values9 (A: 2.2x10124 1/s, ΔE=187.1 kcal/mol).

Results

RF heating was calculated during 20 min of simulated surface coil transmission with 43 W input power. Regional temperature elevation was predicted in the bottom of the tattoo region, especially at its edges (Fig. 3). A CEM43 simulation was performed and showed that the left side edge of the tattoo was heated the most (CEM43=209.8 for 10 min, CEM43=409.5 for 20 min, respectively, see Fig. 4). It is expected that heating of between 480 and 960 CEM43 would cause an immediate superficial burn10. The Arrhenius tissue damage model was calculated to estimate the potential severity of the skin burn, and showing an increase to 0.3 Ω and 0.51 Ω for 10 min heating and 20 min heating, respectively, in the case of a sharpened anchor shape (Fig. 5).

Conclusions

The RF heating safety of tattoo ink pigment was investigated. A possible source of skin burn could be caused by a specific form of iron oxide, Fe3O4, which is known to have 106 times higher electrical conductivity than Fe2O3 due to electron exchange between the FeII and FeIII centers11,12. Fe3O4 is also known as CI pigment black 11, which is insoluble in water and may have impurities, so caution should be used in estimating the dielectric properties of tattoo ink pigment without direct measurement. RF modelling predicted a possible skin burn in an area close to the RF coil copper strip, observed as locally generated heating at the edge of the tattoo shape. For the Arrhenius model, 0.53 Ω is known equate to a 1st degree burn, and 1 Ω is reported to equate as a 2nd degree burn13, so more heating could lead to the subject suffering a severe skin burn. Future studies are needed to evaluate different tattoo pigment shapes and more realistic dielectric properties of the ingredients. In summary, a simulation model of RF heating in tattoo pigment is proposed, which shows that certain tattoo pigments may lead to severe skin burns when performing high field MRI.

Acknowledgements

Oxford-Radcliffe Graduate Scholarship (University College Oxford) and Clarendon Fund.

References

1.Murbach M, Neufeld E, Pruessmann KP, Kuster N. Safe MR scan times based on CEM43 tissue damage thresholds, using electromagnetic and thermal simulations with anatomically correct human models and considering local thermoregulation. Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med . 2012.

2.Kreidstein M, Giguere D, Freiberg A. Case Report: MRI Interaction with Tattoo Pigments: Case Report, Pathophysiology, and Management.; 1995.

3.Wagle W, Smith M. Tattoo-Induced Skin Burn During MR Imaging. 2000.

4.Aissani S, Missoffe A, Pasquier C, Felblinger J. Tattoo (decorative or cosmetic) in MRI: a numerical simulation of the interface between the tattoo and the radio frequency magnetic field. ESMRMB.; 2015.

5.Serup J, Kluger N, Baumler W. Tattooed Skin and Health.; 2015.

6.Christ A, Kainz W, Hahn EG, et al. The Virtual Family—development of surface-based anatomical models of two adults and two children for dosimetric simulations. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:23-38.

7.Morales-Callaghan AM, Aguilar-Bernier M, Martínez-García G, Miranda-Romero A, Valladolid S. Sarcoid granuloma on black tattoo. J Am Acd Dermatol. 2006;55(5).

8.Humphries A, Lister TS, Wright PA, Hughes MP. Determination of the thermal and physical properties of black tattoo ink using compound analysis. Lasers Med Sci. 2013.

9.He X, John B. Quantification of Temperature and Injury Response in Thermal Therapy and Cryosurgery. Crit Rev Biomed Eng. 2003;31(5-6):355-422.

10.Yarmolenko PS, Moon EJ, Landon C, et al. Thresholds for thermal damage to normal tissues: An update. Int J Hyperth. 2013;27(4).

11.Ross J, Matava M. Case report: Tattoo-Induced Skin “Burn” During Magnetic Resonance Imaging in a Professional Football Player. Sports Health. 2011;3(5):431-434.

12.Greenwood N, Earnshaw A. Chemistry of the Elements. 2nd ed. Butterworth-Heinemann; 1997.

13.Van De Sompel D, Kong TY, Ventikos Y. Modelling of experimentally created partial-thickness human skin burns and subsequent therapeutic cooling: A new measure for cooling effectiveness. Med Eng Phys. 2009;31:624-631.

14. Hasgall PA, Di Gennaro F, Baumgartner C, Neufeld E, Gosselin MC, Payne D, Klingenböck A, Kuster N, “IT’IS Database for thermal and electromagnetic parameters of biological tissues,” Version 3.0, September 01st, 2015.

15.Qaddoumi N, Handjojo L, Bigelow T, Easter J, Bray A, Zoughi R. Microwave corrosion detection using open-ended rectangular waveguide sensors. Mater Eval. 2000;58(2):178-184.

16.Yang T-I, Brown RNC, Kempel LC, Kofinas P. Magneto-dielectric properties of polymer– Fe3O4 nanocomposites. J Magn Magn Mater. 2008;320:2714-2720.

17.Tsuda N, Nasu K, Fujimori A, Siratori K. Electronic Conductivity in Oxide. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 2000.

Figures

Figure 1. Location of coil and anchor shaped tattoo ink pigment

Figure 2. Thermal and dielectric properties of tattoo ink pigment and ingredient (297.2 MHz, 310 K)

Figure 3. Surface temperature elevation in 10 mins of heating (T0=37°C)

Figure 4. Results of heat elevation in two local hot spots and thermal simulations

Figure 5. Maximum CEM43 and Arrhenius damage model in 40 mins of heating



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
2221