Oliver Kraff1, Yacine Noureddine1,2, Eileen Frerk1,3, Andreas K Bitz4, Mark E Ladd1,4, and Harald H Quick1,5
1Erwin L. Hahn Institute for MRI, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany, 2MR Safety Testing Laboratory, MR:comp GmbH, Gelsenkirchen, Germany, 3Hamm-Lippstadt University of Applied Sciences, Hamm, Germany, 4Medical Physics in Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany, 5High Field and Hybrid MR Imaging, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
Synopsis
Potential
RF-induced heating from an implanted port catheter in direct vicinity of a
local transmit head coil at 7T was investigated. The assessment included direct
measurements of E-field and temperature in a rectangular head/shoulder phantom
filled with tissue simulating liquid as well as numerical SAR and thermal
simulations in two human body models. Two different RF coils were used for the
evaluation, a custom-made 8-channel head coil and the widely-available Nova
Medical head coil. No evidence of RF-induced heating was found. Identical
transmit power restrictions apply with or without port for both investigated RF
coil types.
Target Audience:
Radiologists
and physicists interested in MR safety and ultra-high field imaging.Purpose:
Ultra-high
field (UHF) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows a more detailed depiction
of microvascularity and microhemorrhages in tumor and ischemic diseases, high-resolution
imaging of cerebral vessel pathologies as well as micro-anatomical depiction of
cortical structures, i.e. aspects which offer potential benefits for patient
treatment in terms of diagnostics, surgical planning, and therapy monitoring
[1, 2]. On the other hand, many patients present with implanted medical devices
(IMD), but only a few of these have been labeled MR conditional up to 7T
magnetic field strength. The German UHF network GUFI has recently published a
recommendation for the inclusion of subjects with passive IMDs, stating that
safe imaging at UHF can be performed if the IMD is 3T MR conditional and
outside a coil-dependent safety area [3]. This work investigates potential RF-induced
heating from a port catheter typically implanted subcutaneously below the
clavicula, i.e. in direct vicinity of the transmit head coil.Methods:
The
IMD under test was a 3T MR conditional port catheter (NuPort-HP power port, PHS
Medical, Germany) made of titanium (Fig. 1). The port was tested both with a
custom-made 8-channel Tx/Rx head coil [4] and a commercially available
32-channel Rx/CP birdcage Tx coil (Nova Medical, NY). First, electric field
measurements (ES3DV2, SPEAG, Switzerland) were compared with and without the implant
present at four distances (2 cm worst-case and typical positions at 10, 13, 15 cm)
with respect to the 8-channel head coil. This RF coil was selected as it could
be easily integrated into the field measurement set-up (Fig. 2A/B) and allowed
different driving modes via a butler matrix (CP+/CP2+). To avoid a potential
drift in field measurements, the applied accepted power was set to 8.7W (at
this power and for a given point, E-field values remained constant after 2
hours of exposure). For
the measurements, a rectangular head/shoulder phantom filled with tissue
simulating liquid was used (permittivity of 43.8 and conductivity of 0.75 S/m). Axial
and coronal planes of 40 mm x 40 mm close to the port were evaluated. Second,
temperature measurements according to ASTM F2182 (Fig. 2C/D) were performed
with both RF coils using fiber-optic probes (Luxtron, CA). A turbo spin echo (TSE)
sequence running at maximum allowed SAR (average power: 11.7W) for 21:44 min
was used for heating. A TSE sequence running at 160% SAR (average power: 18.8W)
for 15 minutes was additionally used for the Nova Medical head coil as a worst-case
example. Here, a solution of salt and hydroxyethylcellulose (permittivity of
78.5, conductivity of 0.4S/m) was used according to the ASTM standard. Third,
numerical SAR and temperature simulations (Semcad-X, SPEAG, Switzerland) for
the Nova Medical head coil, performed in two heterogeneous body models (Duke
and Ella [5]), concluded the RF safety assessment (Fig. 1B/C). Prior to
detailed simulations the coil model was validated using B1 maps in a
homogeneous phantom. Thermal simulations were performed with constant perfusion
and input power levels of 25W for Ella and 22W for Duke, reaching a steady-state
temperature of 39°C in the head after 60 minutes of exposure.Results:
Maximum
E-fields were found within a 3 mm radius around the tip of the port and reached
values of 15/8/7/6 V/m for distances between port and RF coil of 2/10/13/15 cm,
respectively. Maximum percentage deviation compared to the case without port
was 149% (Fig. 3). Values were similar for both CP modes. Maximum E-fields
within the RF coil and without port present reached values of 30V/m and higher.
Temperature measurements performed with both RF coils yielded no temperature
increase at the port, nor at the contralateral side of the phantom. Also, the
high SAR measurement showed no temperature increase (Fig. 4). Likewise, results
from numerical simulations yielded only negligible differences in 10g-averaged
SAR distributions across the port (Fig. 5 Duke). Maximum 10g-averaged local SAR
remained unchanged by the presence of the port. Averaging over 1g of tissue
yielded maximum SAR elevations around the port of 2.4 to 1.5 mW/g for Ella and 2.6
to 1.7 mW/g for Duke. However, the temperature values of 37.3°C remained
unchanged around the port for both human models.Discussion:
Neither
direct measurements of E-fields and temperature, nor numerical SAR and thermal
simulations performed in two human models showed evidence of RF-induced heating
due to the presence of an implanted port catheter in direct vicinity of a local
transmit RF head coil at 7T. Based on these data, identical transmit power
restrictions apply with or without port for both investigated RF coil types. However,
a generalization for any RF coil or implant type cannot be made, and further
configurations would require individual investigations.Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
[1] Kraff
O, et al., MRI at 7 Tesla and above: demonstrated and potential capabilities. J
Magn Reson Imaging 2015;41(1):13-33.
[2] Barrett
TF, et al., Application of ultrahigh field magnetic resonance imaging in the treatment
of brain tumors: a meta-analysis. World Neurosurg. 2016 Feb; 86:450-65.
[3] GUFI
recommendation on “Approval of subjects for measurements at ultra-high-field
MRI”, version 01/21.01.2016, http://www.mr-gufi.de/index.php/en/documents
[4] Orzada
S, et al., 8-Channel Transmit/receive Head Coil for 7T Human Imaging Using
Intrinsically Decoupled Strip Line Elements with Meanders. Proceedings ISMRM, 2009,
abstract 3010.
[5] Christ A, 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(2):N23-38.