True location of deep brain stimulation electrodes differs from what is seen on postoperative magnetic resonance images: An anthropomorphic phantom study

Nuzov, Noa; Bhusal, Bhumi; Henry, Kaylee R; Jiang, Fuchang; Rosenow, Joshua M.; Elahi, Behzad; Golestanirad, Laleh

doi:10.1109/embc48229.2022.9871619

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a highly versatile neuroimaging modality with potential benefits for patients with DBS devices. It is well-suited for postoperative monitoring, target verification and localization of the electrodes [8]- [10], as well as monitoring the functional effects of stimulation on affected brain networks [11]- [16]. The need for MRI is steadily growing, and an estimated 66-75% of patients with DBS implants will require an MRI exam within 10 years following device implantation [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical modification of deep brain stimulation lead trajectories substantially reduces RF heating during MRI at 3 T: From phantom experiments to clinical applications

Bhusal

Rosenow

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Radiofrequency (RF) induced tissue heating around deep brain stimulation leads is a well-known safety risk during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), resulting in strict imaging guidelines and limited allowable protocols. The implanted lead's trajectory and its orientation with respect to the MRI electric fields contribute to variations in the magnitude of RF heating across patients. Currently, there are no consistent requirements for surgically implanting the extracranial portion of the DBS lead. This produces substantial variations in clinical DBS lead trajectories and hinders RF heating predictions. Recent studies showed that incorporating concentric loops in the extracranial trajectory of the lead can reduce RF heating, but the optimal positioning of the loop remains unknown. In this study, we systematically evaluated the RF heating of 244 unique lead trajectories to elucidate the characteristics of the trajectory that minimize RF heating during MRI at 3 T. We also presented the first surgical implementation of these trajectory specifications and compared their RF heating to the RF heating of unmodified trajectories. Methods: We performed phantom experiments to assess the maximum temperature increase, ΔTmax , of 244 unique lead trajectories. We systematically interrogated the effect of three characteristics related to the extracranial portion of the lead trajectory including the number of concentric loops, the size of the loops, and the position of the loops on the skull. Experiments were performed with a full DBS system from Abbott, and RF exposure was generated from a T1-weighted turbo spin echo dark fluid pulse sequence (B1+rms = 2.7 μT). Additional experiments were conducted to assess the reliability of our measurements and to determine the effect of imaging landmarks and perturbations to the DBS device configuration on low-heating lead trajectories. Following the phantom experiments, recommended trajectory specifications were provided to two neurosurgeons and implemented in new patients. Results: Our search protocol elicited lead trajectories with ΔTmax from 0.09 - 7.34 oC. Interestingly, increasing the number of loops and positioning them near the surgical burr hole, especially for the contralateral lead, substantially reduced RF heating. Trajectory specifications based on the results from the phantom experiments were easily adopted during the surgical procedure and generated nearly a 4-fold reduction in RF heating. Discussion/Conclusion: Surgically modifying the extracranial portion of the DBS lead trajectory can substantially mitigate RF heating during MRI at 3 T. Simple adjustments to the lead's configuration can be readily adopted during DBS lead implantation by implementing small concentric loops near the surgical burr hole.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical modification of deep brain stimulation lead trajectories substantially reduces RF heating during MRI at 3 T: From phantom experiments to clinical applications

Bhusal

Rosenow

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Anthropomorphic breast phantoms for radiology imaging: a review

Vasilev,

Omelyanskaya,

Nasibullina

et al. 2023

Digital Diagnostics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phantoms are used to validate diagnostic imaging methods or develop skills of medical professionals. For instance, they allow conducting an unlimited number of imaging studies during medical training, assessing the image quality, optimizing the radiation dose, and testing novel techniques and equipment. Researchers in breast imaging utilize anthropomorphic models to validate, assess, and optimize new methods for diagnosing breast diseases. Such models also facilitate control over the quality of diagnostic systems, help to optimize clinical protocols and improve image reconstruction algorithms. Realistic simulation of organ tissue is essential for addressing these challenges in breast phantoms. The goal of this review is to describe what breast phantoms for diagnostic imaging are currently available on the market and how they are fabricated.Building an accurate breast model with X-ray imaging requires detailed knowledge of its anatomy and radiological features. The breast has a heterogeneous structure composed of glandular and adipose tissues, skin, and appendages, as well as other structures such as vessels and ligaments. In this literature review, we screened PubMed and Google Scholar for the relevant articles. 72 articles and 13 conference papers were included.There are two major types of breast phantoms: computational and physical. Specifically, the computational phantoms are classified into sub-groups depending on what data they use. These include mathematical models, tissue samples, and medical images of the breast. The physical phantoms, on the other hand, are classified based on their composition: molds, 3D printed, or paper-based with contrast inclusions. The main advantage of computational phantoms is the ability to generate large amounts of virtual data, while physical phantoms allow to perform an unlimited number of radiological studies.

show abstract

True location of deep brain stimulation electrodes differs from what is seen on postoperative magnetic resonance images: An anthropomorphic phantom study

Cited by 2 publications

References 22 publications

Surgical modification of deep brain stimulation lead trajectories substantially reduces RF heating during MRI at 3 T: From phantom experiments to clinical applications

Surgical modification of deep brain stimulation lead trajectories substantially reduces RF heating during MRI at 3 T: From phantom experiments to clinical applications

Anthropomorphic breast phantoms for radiology imaging: a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About