Magnetic resonance imaging and deep brain stimulation

Ryan J. Uitti, Yoshio Tsuboi, John D. Putzke, Margaret F. Turk, Zbigniew K Wszolek, Robert J. Witte, Robert E. Wharen, Patrick J. Kelly, Chi S. Zee, Ashwini D. Sharan, Ali R. Rezai, Andres M. Lozano, Roy A E Bakay

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

45 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is associated with deep brain stimulation (DBS) lead displacement or program interference. METHODS: In vitro and in vivo studies were performed with the Itrel II implantable pulse generator (IPG) (Model 7424; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN), Medtronic 3387 and 3389 leads, and a 1.5-T GE Horizon LX scanner (General Electric, Milwaukee, WI). In the in vivo study, two MRI volumetric data sets were compared for each of five patients undergoing staged, bilateral, DBS electrode placement in the thalamic or subthalamic nucleus. The data sets were acquired shortly after the initial implantation and during stereotactic planning for the second implantation (1-8 mo between acquisitions). An additional thalamotomy-treated patient was included as a control patient. Volumetric data were analyzed in a blinded manner, using AnalyzeAVW 3.0 software (Biomedical Imaging Resource, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN), to determine lead movement. In the in vitro study, the IPG and leads were positioned in the magnetic field in various configurations and were systematically assessed for movement. RESULTS: In vivo, the majority of measured deviations (88%) were within the standard error of measurement (1.4 mm). The maximal measured deviation was 3 mm (2% occurrence). Excellent tremor control with stimulation was demonstrated, which did not change after MRI. In vitro, the DBS leads demonstrated no deflection when introduced into the magnetic field. Similarly, no changes in IPG battery strength, lead impedance, or program settings were observed. CONCLUSION: MRI was not associated with significant DBS electrode movement or changes in clinical responses. Other IPG models and components and MRI scanners should be evaluated, to develop specific guidelines for MRI among individuals with implanted DBS systems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1423-1431
Number of pages9
JournalNeurosurgery
Volume51
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2002

Fingerprint

Deep Brain Stimulation
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Magnetic Fields
Electrodes
Subthalamic Nucleus
Thalamic Nuclei
Tremor
Electric Impedance
Software
Guidelines
In Vitro Techniques

Keywords

  • Deep brain stimulation
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • Neurostimulator
  • Phantoms
  • Safety
  • Three-dimensional imaging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Uitti, R. J., Tsuboi, Y., Putzke, J. D., Turk, M. F., Wszolek, Z. K., Witte, R. J., ... Bakay, R. A. E. (2002). Magnetic resonance imaging and deep brain stimulation. Neurosurgery, 51(6), 1423-1431. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-200212000-00012

Magnetic resonance imaging and deep brain stimulation. / Uitti, Ryan J.; Tsuboi, Yoshio; Putzke, John D.; Turk, Margaret F.; Wszolek, Zbigniew K; Witte, Robert J.; Wharen, Robert E.; Kelly, Patrick J.; Zee, Chi S.; Sharan, Ashwini D.; Rezai, Ali R.; Lozano, Andres M.; Bakay, Roy A E.

In: Neurosurgery, Vol. 51, No. 6, 01.12.2002, p. 1423-1431.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Uitti, RJ, Tsuboi, Y, Putzke, JD, Turk, MF, Wszolek, ZK, Witte, RJ, Wharen, RE, Kelly, PJ, Zee, CS, Sharan, AD, Rezai, AR, Lozano, AM & Bakay, RAE 2002, 'Magnetic resonance imaging and deep brain stimulation', Neurosurgery, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 1423-1431. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-200212000-00012
Uitti RJ, Tsuboi Y, Putzke JD, Turk MF, Wszolek ZK, Witte RJ et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and deep brain stimulation. Neurosurgery. 2002 Dec 1;51(6):1423-1431. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-200212000-00012
Uitti, Ryan J. ; Tsuboi, Yoshio ; Putzke, John D. ; Turk, Margaret F. ; Wszolek, Zbigniew K ; Witte, Robert J. ; Wharen, Robert E. ; Kelly, Patrick J. ; Zee, Chi S. ; Sharan, Ashwini D. ; Rezai, Ali R. ; Lozano, Andres M. ; Bakay, Roy A E. / Magnetic resonance imaging and deep brain stimulation. In: Neurosurgery. 2002 ; Vol. 51, No. 6. pp. 1423-1431.
@article{a068abce7b9945c5a6b4d723dd1d5019,
title = "Magnetic resonance imaging and deep brain stimulation",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To determine whether cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is associated with deep brain stimulation (DBS) lead displacement or program interference. METHODS: In vitro and in vivo studies were performed with the Itrel II implantable pulse generator (IPG) (Model 7424; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN), Medtronic 3387 and 3389 leads, and a 1.5-T GE Horizon LX scanner (General Electric, Milwaukee, WI). In the in vivo study, two MRI volumetric data sets were compared for each of five patients undergoing staged, bilateral, DBS electrode placement in the thalamic or subthalamic nucleus. The data sets were acquired shortly after the initial implantation and during stereotactic planning for the second implantation (1-8 mo between acquisitions). An additional thalamotomy-treated patient was included as a control patient. Volumetric data were analyzed in a blinded manner, using AnalyzeAVW 3.0 software (Biomedical Imaging Resource, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN), to determine lead movement. In the in vitro study, the IPG and leads were positioned in the magnetic field in various configurations and were systematically assessed for movement. RESULTS: In vivo, the majority of measured deviations (88{\%}) were within the standard error of measurement (1.4 mm). The maximal measured deviation was 3 mm (2{\%} occurrence). Excellent tremor control with stimulation was demonstrated, which did not change after MRI. In vitro, the DBS leads demonstrated no deflection when introduced into the magnetic field. Similarly, no changes in IPG battery strength, lead impedance, or program settings were observed. CONCLUSION: MRI was not associated with significant DBS electrode movement or changes in clinical responses. Other IPG models and components and MRI scanners should be evaluated, to develop specific guidelines for MRI among individuals with implanted DBS systems.",
keywords = "Deep brain stimulation, Magnetic resonance imaging, Neurostimulator, Phantoms, Safety, Three-dimensional imaging",
author = "Uitti, {Ryan J.} and Yoshio Tsuboi and Putzke, {John D.} and Turk, {Margaret F.} and Wszolek, {Zbigniew K} and Witte, {Robert J.} and Wharen, {Robert E.} and Kelly, {Patrick J.} and Zee, {Chi S.} and Sharan, {Ashwini D.} and Rezai, {Ali R.} and Lozano, {Andres M.} and Bakay, {Roy A E}",
year = "2002",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/00006123-200212000-00012",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "51",
pages = "1423--1431",
journal = "Neurosurgery",
issn = "0148-396X",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Magnetic resonance imaging and deep brain stimulation

AU - Uitti, Ryan J.

AU - Tsuboi, Yoshio

AU - Putzke, John D.

AU - Turk, Margaret F.

AU - Wszolek, Zbigniew K

AU - Witte, Robert J.

AU - Wharen, Robert E.

AU - Kelly, Patrick J.

AU - Zee, Chi S.

AU - Sharan, Ashwini D.

AU - Rezai, Ali R.

AU - Lozano, Andres M.

AU - Bakay, Roy A E

PY - 2002/12/1

Y1 - 2002/12/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To determine whether cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is associated with deep brain stimulation (DBS) lead displacement or program interference. METHODS: In vitro and in vivo studies were performed with the Itrel II implantable pulse generator (IPG) (Model 7424; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN), Medtronic 3387 and 3389 leads, and a 1.5-T GE Horizon LX scanner (General Electric, Milwaukee, WI). In the in vivo study, two MRI volumetric data sets were compared for each of five patients undergoing staged, bilateral, DBS electrode placement in the thalamic or subthalamic nucleus. The data sets were acquired shortly after the initial implantation and during stereotactic planning for the second implantation (1-8 mo between acquisitions). An additional thalamotomy-treated patient was included as a control patient. Volumetric data were analyzed in a blinded manner, using AnalyzeAVW 3.0 software (Biomedical Imaging Resource, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN), to determine lead movement. In the in vitro study, the IPG and leads were positioned in the magnetic field in various configurations and were systematically assessed for movement. RESULTS: In vivo, the majority of measured deviations (88%) were within the standard error of measurement (1.4 mm). The maximal measured deviation was 3 mm (2% occurrence). Excellent tremor control with stimulation was demonstrated, which did not change after MRI. In vitro, the DBS leads demonstrated no deflection when introduced into the magnetic field. Similarly, no changes in IPG battery strength, lead impedance, or program settings were observed. CONCLUSION: MRI was not associated with significant DBS electrode movement or changes in clinical responses. Other IPG models and components and MRI scanners should be evaluated, to develop specific guidelines for MRI among individuals with implanted DBS systems.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To determine whether cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is associated with deep brain stimulation (DBS) lead displacement or program interference. METHODS: In vitro and in vivo studies were performed with the Itrel II implantable pulse generator (IPG) (Model 7424; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN), Medtronic 3387 and 3389 leads, and a 1.5-T GE Horizon LX scanner (General Electric, Milwaukee, WI). In the in vivo study, two MRI volumetric data sets were compared for each of five patients undergoing staged, bilateral, DBS electrode placement in the thalamic or subthalamic nucleus. The data sets were acquired shortly after the initial implantation and during stereotactic planning for the second implantation (1-8 mo between acquisitions). An additional thalamotomy-treated patient was included as a control patient. Volumetric data were analyzed in a blinded manner, using AnalyzeAVW 3.0 software (Biomedical Imaging Resource, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN), to determine lead movement. In the in vitro study, the IPG and leads were positioned in the magnetic field in various configurations and were systematically assessed for movement. RESULTS: In vivo, the majority of measured deviations (88%) were within the standard error of measurement (1.4 mm). The maximal measured deviation was 3 mm (2% occurrence). Excellent tremor control with stimulation was demonstrated, which did not change after MRI. In vitro, the DBS leads demonstrated no deflection when introduced into the magnetic field. Similarly, no changes in IPG battery strength, lead impedance, or program settings were observed. CONCLUSION: MRI was not associated with significant DBS electrode movement or changes in clinical responses. Other IPG models and components and MRI scanners should be evaluated, to develop specific guidelines for MRI among individuals with implanted DBS systems.

KW - Deep brain stimulation

KW - Magnetic resonance imaging

KW - Neurostimulator

KW - Phantoms

KW - Safety

KW - Three-dimensional imaging

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036957845&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036957845&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00006123-200212000-00012

DO - 10.1097/00006123-200212000-00012

M3 - Article

C2 - 12445347

AN - SCOPUS:0036957845

VL - 51

SP - 1423

EP - 1431

JO - Neurosurgery

JF - Neurosurgery

SN - 0148-396X

IS - 6

ER -