Ferromagnetic movements of middle ear implants and stapes prostheses in a 3-T magnetic resonance field

Michael H. Fritsch, Jason J. Gutt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Hypothesis: A 3-T magnetic resonance field may cause motion or displacement of middle ear implants not seen in studies with 1.5-T magnets. Background: Previous publications have described the safety limitations of some otologic implants in 1.5-T magnetic resonance fields. Several company-wide recalls of implants were issued. No studies to date have been reported for otologic implants within a 3-T magnetic resonance field, nor have there been comparisons with a 1.5-T field strength. Methods: Eighteen commonly used middle ear implants and prostheses were selected. In Part 1, the prostheses were placed in Petri dishes and exposed to a 3-T magnetic resonance field. In Part 2, the particular prostheses that showed movement in Part 1 were placed into their intended use positions within temporal bone laboratory specimens and exposed to a 3-T field. Both parts were repeated in a 1.5-T field. Results: In Part 1, three prostheses moved dramatically from their start positions when exposed to the 3-T magnetic resonance field. In Part 2, the three particular prostheses that showed movement in Part 1 showed no gross displacement or movement from their start positions within the temporal bone laboratory specimens. No implants moved in the 1.5-T field in either Part 1 or Part 2. Conclusion: Certain stapes prostheses move dramatically in Petri dishes in 3-T fields. When placed into temporal bone laboratory specimens, the same prostheses show no signs of movement from the surgical site in a 3-T field, and it appears that the surgical position holds the implants firmly in place. Results of published 1.5-T field studies should not be used directly for safety recommendations in a 3-T magnetic resonance. Heat, voltage induction, and vibration during exposure to the magnetic resonance fields should be considered as additional possible safety issues. Preference should be given to platinum and titanium implants in manufacturing processes and surgical selection.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)225-230
Number of pages6
JournalOtology and Neurotology
Volume26
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2005

Fingerprint

Ossicular Prosthesis
Stapes
Magnetic Fields
Prostheses and Implants
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Temporal Bone
Safety
Magnets
Vibration
Titanium
Platinum
Hot Temperature

Keywords

  • Ear
  • Implant
  • Magnetic
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • Prosthesis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Neuroscience(all)

Cite this

Ferromagnetic movements of middle ear implants and stapes prostheses in a 3-T magnetic resonance field. / Fritsch, Michael H.; Gutt, Jason J.

In: Otology and Neurotology, Vol. 26, No. 2, 03.2005, p. 225-230.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e1257ca9e90b449eb73847aa32820413,
title = "Ferromagnetic movements of middle ear implants and stapes prostheses in a 3-T magnetic resonance field",
abstract = "Hypothesis: A 3-T magnetic resonance field may cause motion or displacement of middle ear implants not seen in studies with 1.5-T magnets. Background: Previous publications have described the safety limitations of some otologic implants in 1.5-T magnetic resonance fields. Several company-wide recalls of implants were issued. No studies to date have been reported for otologic implants within a 3-T magnetic resonance field, nor have there been comparisons with a 1.5-T field strength. Methods: Eighteen commonly used middle ear implants and prostheses were selected. In Part 1, the prostheses were placed in Petri dishes and exposed to a 3-T magnetic resonance field. In Part 2, the particular prostheses that showed movement in Part 1 were placed into their intended use positions within temporal bone laboratory specimens and exposed to a 3-T field. Both parts were repeated in a 1.5-T field. Results: In Part 1, three prostheses moved dramatically from their start positions when exposed to the 3-T magnetic resonance field. In Part 2, the three particular prostheses that showed movement in Part 1 showed no gross displacement or movement from their start positions within the temporal bone laboratory specimens. No implants moved in the 1.5-T field in either Part 1 or Part 2. Conclusion: Certain stapes prostheses move dramatically in Petri dishes in 3-T fields. When placed into temporal bone laboratory specimens, the same prostheses show no signs of movement from the surgical site in a 3-T field, and it appears that the surgical position holds the implants firmly in place. Results of published 1.5-T field studies should not be used directly for safety recommendations in a 3-T magnetic resonance. Heat, voltage induction, and vibration during exposure to the magnetic resonance fields should be considered as additional possible safety issues. Preference should be given to platinum and titanium implants in manufacturing processes and surgical selection.",
keywords = "Ear, Implant, Magnetic, Magnetic resonance imaging, Prosthesis",
author = "Fritsch, {Michael H.} and Gutt, {Jason J.}",
year = "2005",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1097/00129492-200503000-00016",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "225--230",
journal = "Otology and Neurotology",
issn = "1531-7129",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ferromagnetic movements of middle ear implants and stapes prostheses in a 3-T magnetic resonance field

AU - Fritsch, Michael H.

AU - Gutt, Jason J.

PY - 2005/3

Y1 - 2005/3

N2 - Hypothesis: A 3-T magnetic resonance field may cause motion or displacement of middle ear implants not seen in studies with 1.5-T magnets. Background: Previous publications have described the safety limitations of some otologic implants in 1.5-T magnetic resonance fields. Several company-wide recalls of implants were issued. No studies to date have been reported for otologic implants within a 3-T magnetic resonance field, nor have there been comparisons with a 1.5-T field strength. Methods: Eighteen commonly used middle ear implants and prostheses were selected. In Part 1, the prostheses were placed in Petri dishes and exposed to a 3-T magnetic resonance field. In Part 2, the particular prostheses that showed movement in Part 1 were placed into their intended use positions within temporal bone laboratory specimens and exposed to a 3-T field. Both parts were repeated in a 1.5-T field. Results: In Part 1, three prostheses moved dramatically from their start positions when exposed to the 3-T magnetic resonance field. In Part 2, the three particular prostheses that showed movement in Part 1 showed no gross displacement or movement from their start positions within the temporal bone laboratory specimens. No implants moved in the 1.5-T field in either Part 1 or Part 2. Conclusion: Certain stapes prostheses move dramatically in Petri dishes in 3-T fields. When placed into temporal bone laboratory specimens, the same prostheses show no signs of movement from the surgical site in a 3-T field, and it appears that the surgical position holds the implants firmly in place. Results of published 1.5-T field studies should not be used directly for safety recommendations in a 3-T magnetic resonance. Heat, voltage induction, and vibration during exposure to the magnetic resonance fields should be considered as additional possible safety issues. Preference should be given to platinum and titanium implants in manufacturing processes and surgical selection.

AB - Hypothesis: A 3-T magnetic resonance field may cause motion or displacement of middle ear implants not seen in studies with 1.5-T magnets. Background: Previous publications have described the safety limitations of some otologic implants in 1.5-T magnetic resonance fields. Several company-wide recalls of implants were issued. No studies to date have been reported for otologic implants within a 3-T magnetic resonance field, nor have there been comparisons with a 1.5-T field strength. Methods: Eighteen commonly used middle ear implants and prostheses were selected. In Part 1, the prostheses were placed in Petri dishes and exposed to a 3-T magnetic resonance field. In Part 2, the particular prostheses that showed movement in Part 1 were placed into their intended use positions within temporal bone laboratory specimens and exposed to a 3-T field. Both parts were repeated in a 1.5-T field. Results: In Part 1, three prostheses moved dramatically from their start positions when exposed to the 3-T magnetic resonance field. In Part 2, the three particular prostheses that showed movement in Part 1 showed no gross displacement or movement from their start positions within the temporal bone laboratory specimens. No implants moved in the 1.5-T field in either Part 1 or Part 2. Conclusion: Certain stapes prostheses move dramatically in Petri dishes in 3-T fields. When placed into temporal bone laboratory specimens, the same prostheses show no signs of movement from the surgical site in a 3-T field, and it appears that the surgical position holds the implants firmly in place. Results of published 1.5-T field studies should not be used directly for safety recommendations in a 3-T magnetic resonance. Heat, voltage induction, and vibration during exposure to the magnetic resonance fields should be considered as additional possible safety issues. Preference should be given to platinum and titanium implants in manufacturing processes and surgical selection.

KW - Ear

KW - Implant

KW - Magnetic

KW - Magnetic resonance imaging

KW - Prosthesis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=15744404158&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=15744404158&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00129492-200503000-00016

DO - 10.1097/00129492-200503000-00016

M3 - Article

C2 - 15793409

AN - SCOPUS:15744404158

VL - 26

SP - 225

EP - 230

JO - Otology and Neurotology

JF - Otology and Neurotology

SN - 1531-7129

IS - 2

ER -