Application of implantable medical devices in magnetic resonance imaging examination and clinical recommendations

Share this content in WeChat

• Investigation Reseach •

LIANG Hudie YUAN Xianshun CUI Xinyuan LI Huihua LI Xue ZHUANG Lina

Cite this article as: LIANG H D, YUAN X S, CUI X Y, et al. Application of implantable medical devices in magnetic resonance imaging examination and clinical recommendations[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2024, 15(4): 153-158. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2024.04.024.

Abstract

[Abstract] Objective To investigate the application status of implantable medical devices in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination and put forward clinical suggestions.Materials and Methods This study was a cross-sectional investigation, using convenient sampling method. Relying on the Nursing Group of Radiology Society of Chinese Medical Association, an electronic questionnaire was distributed to nurses engaged in imaging nursing from February to March 2023 by asking questions. In this study, the clinical application of MRI examination of compatible, implant material devices, implant materials, magnetic field strength, implantation time and scanning time were investigated. After data collection, Excel 2016 software was used for data analysis. Frequency and percentage (%) were used for descriptive statistical analysis of counting data.Results A total of 227 hospitals in 28 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government have filled in valid questionnaires. The investigation on the clinical application of nine types of implantable medical devices showed that more than 75.00% hospitals require the signature of patients or their families before examination, 81.01% hospitals require the signature of clinicians who implant compatible pacemakers, and 77.85% hospitals require to carry instructions. Among them, artificial joints, cardiac stents and orthopedic internal fixators were the most allowed or partially allowed hospitals, accounting for 87.22%, 86.79% and 81.05%, respectively. The number of hospitals allowed or partially allowed for MRI examination of cochlear implant was the least, accounting for 31.28%. Except for the infusion port, the proportion of other eight types of implantable medical device hospitals requiring scanning magnetic field ≤1.5 T was between 64.71% and 83.15%. The proportion of limited implantation time >3 weeks was between 63.01% and 92.96%. The proportion of limited scanning time ≤15 min was between 28.32% and 39.44%.Conclusions At present, there were different clinical applications and clinical adaptation conditions of nine types of implantable medical devices in domestic hospitals. Establishing a unified and homogeneous clinical safety assessment and clinical application standard in China has certain guiding significance for clinical safety screening and judgment of nurses in imaging department.

[Keywords] implantable medical devices；magnetic resonance imaging；investigation；safety assessment；clinical suggestions

Contributor Information

LIANG Hudie¹ YUAN Xianshun¹ CUI Xinyuan² LI Huihua¹ LI Xue³ ZHUANG Lina^4*

¹ Department of Radiology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan 250021, China

² Department of Radiology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin 150086, China

³ Department of Radiology, Daping Hospital of Army Military Medical University, Chongqing 400042, China

⁴ Department of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116011, China

Corresponding author: ZHUANG L N, E-mail: zln721027@163.com

Conflicts of interest None.

Publication Information

Received 2023-08-15

Accepted 2024-03-22

DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2024.04.024

Text

References

[1]

YANG A C, SHI L, ZHANG X, et al. Research progress on safety of DBS electrode in magnetic resonance environment[J]. Chin J Neurosurg, 2014, 30(8): 846-848. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-2346.2014.08.026.

[2]

Quality Management and Safety Management Group, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Group, Chinese Society of Radiology. China expert consensus on safety management of magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Chin J Radiol, 2017, 51(10): 725-731. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1005-1201.2017.10.003.

[3]

Imaging Technology Society of Chinese Medical Association, Professional Committee of Medical, Technologists of Chinese Medical Doctor Association. Expert consensus on safety guidelines for clinical application of MRI[J]. Chin J Radiol, 2023, 57(9): 955-961. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112149-20230113-00036.

[4]

YU Z T, ZHANG M H, YU S, et al. Analysis of R & D, production and application of biomedical Ti alloys materials applied in medical devices of China[J]. China Med Device Inf, 2012, 18(7): 1-8. DOI: 10.15971/j.cnki.cmdi.2012.07.013.

[5]

ZHENG C, YANG P F. Analysis of MRI-related adverse event reports[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2020, 11(6): 438-443. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2020.06.008.

[6]

CHEN Y J, PENG Z X. Research progress of polyetherketoneketone and its composites for orthopedic implant materials[J]. Chin J Orthop, 2022, 42(9): 603-608. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121113-20211105-00638.

[7]

HE W, WANG C B, GAO H, et al. Warming effect and safety analysis of metal implants in MR examination[J]. China Med Devices, 2019, 34(6): 49-52. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-1633.2019.06.013.

[8]

ZHAO L. Joint prosthesis: material characteristics and physical therapy[J]. Chin J Tissue Eng Res, 2015, 19(12): 1964-1968. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2015.12.030.

[9]

WANG Q, GUO G P, SONG G R, et al. Research progress of bioprosthetic materials for artificial joint[J]. J Med Res, 2020, 49(7): 171-173, 178. DOI: 10.11969/j.issn.1673-548X.2020.07.037.

[10]

DEMIRTURK KOCASARAC H, KURSUN-CAKMAK E S, USTAOGLU G, et al. Assessment of signal-to-noise ratio and contrast-to-noise ratio in 3 T magnetic resonance imaging in the presence of zirconium, titanium, and titanium-zirconium alloy implants[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol, 2020, 129(1): 80-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.oooo.2019.08.020.

[11]

SEO Y, WANG Z J. Measurement and evaluation of specific absorption rate and temperature elevation caused by an artificial hip joint during MRI scanning[J/OL]. Sci Rep, 2021, 11(1): 1134 [2023-08-14]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33441883/. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-80828-7.

[12]

HIGGINS J V, SHELDON S H, WATSON R E, et al. "Power-on resets" in cardiac implantable electronic devices during magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Heart Rhythm, 2015, 12(3): 540-544. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.10.039.

[13]

BAILEY W M, MAZUR A, MCCOTTER C, et al. Clinical safety of the ProMRI pacemaker system in patients subjected to thoracic spine and cardiac 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging scanning conditions[J]. Heart Rhythm, 2016, 13(2): 464-471. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.09.021.

[14]

SCHALLER R D, BRUNKER T, RILEY M P, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices with abandoned leads[J]. JAMA Cardiol, 2021, 6(5): 549-556. DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.7572.

[15]

WU D Y, LU F M, LI Q, et al. Evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging conditional pacemaker in patients subjected to 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging scanning[J]. Chin J Card Arrhythm, 2017, 21(2): 103-106. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-6638.2017.02.004.

[16]

LI Q Y, GUO C J, FANG D P, et al. Initial studies on the safety and site of leadless pacemaker in cardiac chamber under the 3.0T nuclear magnetic resonance[J]. Chin J Card Pacing Electrophysiol, 2020, 34(3): 278-280. DOI: 10.13333/j.cnki.cjcpe.2020.03.007.

[17]

NING X H, FAN X H, CHEN K P, et al. The efficacy and safety of magnetic resonance imaging scanning at 3.0 tesla in patients with magnetic resonance-conditional pacemakers[J]. Chin J Card Arrhythm, 2020, 24(3): 288-292. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn.113859-20190719-00166.

[18]

WEBER C, WEBER M, EKINCI O, et al. Atrial septal defects type Ⅱ: noninvasive evaluation of patients before implantation of an Amplatzer Septal Occluder and on follow-up by magnetic resonance imaging compared with TEE and invasive measurement[J]. Eur Radiol, 2008, 18(11): 2406-2413. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-1033-7.

[19]

STEIGER H J, VAN LOON J J. Virtues and drawbacks of titanium alloy aneurysm clips[J/OL]. Acta Neurochir Suppl, 1999, 72: 81-88 [2023-08-14]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10337415/. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-7091-6377-1_7.

[20]

TANG M H, KAWAHIRA S, NOMURA N, et al. Torque property of titanium alloy cerebral aneurysm clips in a magnetic resonance scanner[J/OL]. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 2019, 31(1): 6 [2023-08-14]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31838592/. DOI: 10.1007/s10856-019-6329-4.

[21]

NAPLES J G, RUCKENSTEIN M J. Cochlear implant[J]. Otolaryngol Clin North Am, 2020, 53(1): 87-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.otc.2019.09.004.

[22]

TODT I, GUERKOV R, GEHL H B, et al. Comparison of cochlear implant magnets and their MRI artifact size[J/OL]. Biomed Res Int, 2020, 2020: 5086291 [2023-08-14]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32420348/. DOI: 10.1155/2020/5086291.

[23]

CASS N D, HONCE J M, O'DELL A L, et al. First MRI with new cochlear implant with rotatable internal magnet system and proposal for standardization of reporting magnet-related artifact size[J]. and, 2019, 40(7): 883-891. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002269.

[24]

JONKER S M R, BERENDSCHOT T T J M, SAELENS I E Y, et al. Phakic intraocular lenses: an overview[J]. Indian J Ophthalmol, 2020, 68(12): 2779-2796. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_2995_20.

[25]

Ophthalmology Group, Ophthalmology Branch of Chinese Medical Association. Chinese expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of intraocular foreign bodies (2021)[J]. Chin J Ophthalmol, 2021, 57(11): 819-824. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112142-20210810-00373.

[26]

NIEDERHUBER J E, ENSMINGER W, GYVES J W, et al. Totally implanted venous and arterial access system to replace external catheters in cancer treatment[J]. Surgery, 1982, 92(4): 706-712.

[27]

BERTOGLIO S, CAFIERO F, MESZAROS P, et al. PICC-PORT totally implantable vascular access device in breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy[J]. J Vasc Access, 2020, 21(4): 460-466. DOI: 10.1177/1129729819884482.

[28]

OH S B, PARK K, KIM J J, et al. Safety and feasibility of 3-month interval access and flushing for maintenance of totally implantable central venous port system in colorectal cancer patients after completion of curative intended treatments[J/OL]. Medicine, 2021, 100(2): e24156 [2023-08-14]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33466189/. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024156.

[29]

HUANG X F, XUE Y H, LU J, et al. Research progress of different routes implanted into intravenous infusion port and its complications[J]. Nurs J Chin People's Liberation Army, 2017, 34(14): 49-51. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-9993.2017.14.012.

PREV Research on multi-source cardiac image segmentation method based on modal interaction learning

NEXT Imaging manifestation of left temporal paraganglioma: One case report

LINK

Tel & Fax: +8610-67113815 E-mail: editor@cjmri.cn