title: Behavior of metal implants used in ENT surgery in 7 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.
abstract: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become increasingly important as an imaging technique in cross-sectional imaging of head and neck diseases. To investigate whether MRI examinations can be performed without risk in patients with metal implants even at higher field strengths, we examined different materials in 7 Tesla MRI. Implants near sensory organs like the middle ear or eye are of particular interest here. Using the 7 Tesla research MRI for small animals, we tested implants made of various metals like titanium, gold, gold/platinum, platinum/iridium, gold-plated silver, PTFE and stainless steel for heating, translocation and rotation according to a standardized protocol. A fiber optic temperature probe measured the heating of the implant before, during and after MRI scanning. None of the implants showed significant heating. The gold-plated stainless steel ventilation tube was the only implant to markedly change its position already in the Petri dish. Of the remaining implants, a trachea support ring, a nose dilatator and the wire from the ventilation tubes moved during vibration of the Petri dish. With exception of two implants, all implants changed positions in the water bath. In the swim test, the gold implants showed the least movement of all the implants. In this study, the properties of the non-ferromagnetic implant materials differed in the 7 Tesla MRI. Stainless steel ventilation tubes, the trachea support ring and the nose dilatator were not suited for the 7 Tesla MRI system, because they changed their position during MRI. In the case of ventilation tubes with a steel wire, the wire should be removed before MRI to prevent injury to the external auditory canal. There was a tendency for the pure gold implants to move less in the 7 Tesla MRI than all other tested materials. General statements cannot be made about the MRI suitability of different implants. Every implant should be individually examined to confirm its definitive MRI compatibility. Particularly, middle ear implants warrant special attention here due to their closeness to the oval window.
authors.affiliation: Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Klinik für Hals-, Nasen-, Ohrenheilkunde, Campus Mitte, Schumannstr. 20/21, 10117, Berlin, Germany. ariane.debelius@charite.de
authors.forename: Ariane
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Thelen
authors.forename: Hans-Christian
authors.initials: HC
authors.lastname: Bauknecht
authors.forename: Patrick
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Asbach
authors.forename: Thomas
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Schrom
mesh_terms: D019544:Equipment Failure Analysis; D005548:Foreign-Body Migration; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000379:methods*; D008670:Metals; D010036:Otolaryngology / Q000295:instrumentation*; D019736:Prostheses and Implants; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D013696:Temperature
chemical_list: D008670:Metals