The presence of a static magnetic field (Bo), a radiofrequency field (RF), a dynamic gradient which varies in time and loud noises during an MR examination could increase patient risk. Specifically, a magnetic field could interfere with ferromagnetic material leading to one of the following five dangerous interactions: 1) projectile effect, 2) twisting, 3) burning, 4) artefacts and 5) device malfunction. The projectile effect is when an object is attracted by the magnet with the risk, as reported in literature, of hitting the patient, operators and/or the instrument. Objects which typically can undergo this effect are oxygen and helium cylinders, IV stands, cleaning trolleys, chairs, lamp holders, scissors, forceps, clampers, traction weights, monitoring instruments, and especially metallic splinters within the patient. Twisting (torsion) typically occurs with cerebral vascular clamps and cochlear implants. If parts of implants are involved a malfunction may result. Burns can be caused when electrically conductive material is introduced within the magnet, for example, ECG electrodes, monitoring cables and coils which are in contact with the patient's skin, as well as tattoos and eye-liners that contain iron-oxides. Artefacts can be induced by RF emission of implanted devices which can be mistaken for noise of the receiving coil. Implanted devices can induce signal voids which mask or simulate pathologies. Electrical or mechanical malfunction of implanted devices includes pacemakers which can stimulate inappropriately or at an elevated frequency yielding a distorted ECG with altered T-waves. The risk for patients can be reduced by specific educational programs within individual radiology departments which include other specializations and external referring physicians with the aim of developing a standardized safety protocol.

Patient safety issues in magnetic resonance imaging: state of the art

Stecco A;Carriero A
2007-01-01

Abstract

The presence of a static magnetic field (Bo), a radiofrequency field (RF), a dynamic gradient which varies in time and loud noises during an MR examination could increase patient risk. Specifically, a magnetic field could interfere with ferromagnetic material leading to one of the following five dangerous interactions: 1) projectile effect, 2) twisting, 3) burning, 4) artefacts and 5) device malfunction. The projectile effect is when an object is attracted by the magnet with the risk, as reported in literature, of hitting the patient, operators and/or the instrument. Objects which typically can undergo this effect are oxygen and helium cylinders, IV stands, cleaning trolleys, chairs, lamp holders, scissors, forceps, clampers, traction weights, monitoring instruments, and especially metallic splinters within the patient. Twisting (torsion) typically occurs with cerebral vascular clamps and cochlear implants. If parts of implants are involved a malfunction may result. Burns can be caused when electrically conductive material is introduced within the magnet, for example, ECG electrodes, monitoring cables and coils which are in contact with the patient's skin, as well as tattoos and eye-liners that contain iron-oxides. Artefacts can be induced by RF emission of implanted devices which can be mistaken for noise of the receiving coil. Implanted devices can induce signal voids which mask or simulate pathologies. Electrical or mechanical malfunction of implanted devices includes pacemakers which can stimulate inappropriately or at an elevated frequency yielding a distorted ECG with altered T-waves. The risk for patients can be reduced by specific educational programs within individual radiology departments which include other specializations and external referring physicians with the aim of developing a standardized safety protocol.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11579/96201
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 46
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 34
social impact