Synopsis
Magnetic resonance techniques are considered to be
not harmful. The three electromagnetic fields used for MR - static magnetic
field, switched gradient fields, and radio frequency field - do not result in
irreversible changes of human tissue, as long as certain limits are not
exceeded. However, the applied fields show effects, which may cause severe
hazards for patients, staff, and material, if MR examinations are not performed
properly.Objective
Information
about the potential dangers
· of the static magnetic field B0 (interactions with cells and tissues, interactions with ferromagnetic objects:
force and torque; requirements for MR safe implants and devices),
· of the low frequency (= audio
frequency) switched gradient fields (induction of current pulses in nerves, peripheral nerve stimulation, possible cardiac nerve stimulation; noise;
effects on implants),
· of the radio frequency field
B1 (interaction with tissue: warming (RF absorption, SAR), burns caused by current
loops with skin-skin contact; interaction with metals and conducting material:
induction, heating, sparking, burns at implant-tissue contact surfaces;
requirements for MR safe implants and devices),
· of
the cryo system (loss of cooling/quench, handling of cryogenic agents).
1. Risks
associated with the static field
Up to now there
is no scientific evidence that static magnetic (B
0) fields within
the range typically used for MR produce permanent bioeffects that could lead to
health problems [1]. Only transient effects causing slight indispositions of persons
are possible, usually related to movements in inhomogeneous parts of the field.
However, in spite of the low interaction with body tissue, the static field B
0
represents the hazard of most concern: As B
0 is commonly produced
by a superconducting coil, it is always switched on. Ferromagnetic objects may
be accelerated towards the magnet. Persons lying in the scanner or standing
near the bore opening may be injured. Ferromagnetic implants may be dislocated
and damage surrounding tissue. Fatal outcomes of these interactions have been
reported [2,3]. While B
0 is strongest in the scanner bore, the field
extends with significant strength several meters around the scanner. A field
strength of 0.5 mT defines the border of the 'controlled access area'. This area
must be blocked to the general public [4], as impairment of active implants,
e.g. pacemakers, cannot be excluded even in the fringe field of an MR scanner.
2. Risks
associated with rapidly switched magnetic fields (gradient fields)
The switched
gradient system (G
x, G
y, G
z), necessary to
provide spatial information, is active during scanning only. A set of three orthogonal
small magnetic fields are generated, which modify the static field. Switching
frequencies are in the order of 100 Hz to several kHz, i.e. in the range of
audible frequencies.
Concerning safety, two effects are of relevance. The first
is peripheral nerve stimulation. Its occurrence depends on gradient steepness
and switching time. The exact function depends on the model applied [5], and
people are differently susceptible to stimulation [6]. Peripheral nerve
stimulation is not by itself dangerous, but it is taken as last noticeable
limit before the possible generation of stimulation in vital nerves, e.g. cardiac
nerves, which must be avoided at any case.
The
second effect is noise production. Noise levels of 99 dB(A) may be reached,
sometimes even more, and hearing damage is possible [7]. If implants are
present, gradient switching may induce current pulses, which interfere with the
function of the implant electronics.
3. Risks
associated with the pulsed radiofrequency field
The radio frequency field B
1 has a significant power
only inside or adjacent to the excitation coil. In most cases the body coil is
used for excitation, so that the RF field stretches over a significant portion
of the body. The main concern is heating due to eddy currents, which can be
rather high especially in the presence of metallic implants. The danger of
heating hazards is commonly underestimated. Most MR accidents reported in the
FDA collection of reports on adverse events (the Manufacturer And User facility
Device Experience, MAUDE [8]) refer to burns [9]. While overall warming of the
body is limited to acceptable levels by limiting RF absorption (the RF Specific
Absorption Rate (SAR) must be below 4 W/kg body weight), heat release at skin-skin
contacts in loops formed by arms or legs may cause severe burns at the contact
point. Even second or third degree burns have been reported [10]. In metallic
implants the current is higher than in surrounding tissue. At crossover points
of the current into or out of the implant the local current density in the
tissue may be so high that burns are possible. Similar effects may also occur in
wires outside the tissue, but inside the range of the excitation coil. Especially at bad
connections sparking may occur, which in the extreme case may ignite
inflammable material [11].
Sparks can also be generated from carbon rods, as
used for external fixation (Fig.1).
4. Risks
associated with the cryogenic system
In addition to the electromagnetic fields cryogens
- usually liquid Helium (LHe) - used in superconducting magnets must be
considered. Cryogens pose a risk only in case of a quench, which in most sites never
happens. During an accidental or deliberate quench of the magnetic field
superconductivity is disrupted and the current crosses over to a conducting
copper matrix, where the energy of the current is converted to heat. This
causes the liquid helium to immediately evaporate, which in the end causes a
700-fold volume increase compared to liquid He. This requires the venting off
of typically 700 m
3 gaseous He within a couple of seconds. Usually
quench lines are designed to handle this amount of gas. However, imperfectly
maintained quench lines may be blocked. In this case the gas will evaporate
into the scanner room ('in-room quench'), which in most cases is far smaller
than 700 m
3, creating a severe overpressure. This has happened a couple of times, and
severe damage to buildings is reported. Therefore, careful
maintenance of the cryo system and the quench lines is mandatory to prevent
the danger of an in-room quench.
Safety limits
To cope with
MR hazards, limits of fields and field changes have been determined in
international standards, especially for the specific absorption rate (SAR) to
prevent tissue injury due to excessive warming, and for slew rate and slope of
switched gradients to prevent nerve stimulation. While these limits provide
adequate safety against unwanted physiological reactions, they do not describe
adequate limitations for interaction of these fields with implants, especially
active implants. To be able to provide conditions that allow safe MR
examinations also in the presence of implants, in addition to limit
values based on physiology further scanner parameters must be controlled and
new limiting values must be defined. This is accomplished by the introduction
of a specific implant scanning option (Fixed Parameter Option: Basic, FPO:B) in
the international MR safety standard [4] and technical specifications for
Implants [12].
Conclusion
To prevent accidents and damages, everybody working
with an MR scanner must be informed about possible risks originating from the
electromagnetic fields and the cryogens of the MR system.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
[1] Schenck JF (2005) Physical interactions of static
magnetic fields with living tissue. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular
Biology 87:185-204
[2] Chen DW (2001) Boy, 6, Dies of skull injury during
MRI. The New York Times, July 31, 2001
[3] Klucznik RP, Carrier DA, Pyka R, Haid RW (1993) Placement of a
ferromagnetic intracerebral aneurysm clip in a magnetic field with a fatal
outcome. Radiology 187:855-85
[4] International Electrotechnical Commission, IEC
(2016) Medical electrical equipment - Part 2-33: Particular requirements for
the basic safety and essential performance of magnetic resonance equipment for
medical diagnosis. International Standard IEC 60601-2-33:2010+AMD1:2013+AMD2:2015
CSV Consolidated version:
International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, Switzerland
[5] Schaefer DJ (1998) Safety aspects of switched
gradient fields. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 6:731-748
[6] Bourland JD, Nyenhuis JA, Schaefer DJ (1999)
Physiologic effects of intense MR gradient fields. Neuroimaging Clin N Am
9:363-377
[7] McJury M, Shellock F (2000) Auditory noise
associated with MR procedures: A review. J Magn Reson Imaging 12:37-45
[8] MAUDE Manufacturer and user facility device
experience
www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/TextSearch.cfm
[9] Hardy PT, Weil KM (2010)
A review of thermal mr injuries. Radiologic Technology 81:606-609
[10] Knopp MV, Essig M, Debus J, Zabel HJ, van Kaick G
(1996) Unusual burns of the lower extremities caused by a closed conducting
loop in a patient at MR imaging. Radiology 200:572-575
[11] Kugel H, Bremer C, Püschel M, Fischbach R, Lenzen
H, Tombach B, Van Aken H, Heindel W (2003) Hazardous situation in the MR bore:
Induction in EEG leads causes fire. Eur Radiol 13:690-694
[12]
ISO/TC150/SC6/JWG2 and
IEC SC62B/JWG1 (2012) Assessment of the
safety of magnetic resonance imaging for patients with an active implantable
medical device, ISO/TS 10974:2012, International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland