Safety of intrauterine devices in MRI.
von Weymarn, C
MetadataShow full item record
<h4>Objectives</h4>The paucity of safety information on intrauterine devices (IUD) for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations is clinically relevant. The aim of this study is to evaluate the MRI safety of clinically used IUDs composed of copper/gold and stainless steel at 1.5T and 3.0T.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We assessed and compared the displacement force, torque effects, presence of imaging artifacts and heating of IUDs composed of copper/gold (western IUDs) and stainless steel (China) on 1.5 and 3.0T MRI systems.<h4>Results</h4>Gold/Copper IUDs can show small deflection angles of 7° ± 7° in the worst-case field gradient of 40T/m (equivalent to magnetic force of 0.5 mN), while the stainless steel IUD experienced significant magnetic force and deflection (Force > 7.5 N; deflection angle 90° ± 1°). Manual rotation and suspension method show no torque effects on gold/copper IUDs but high torque effects were observed by manual rotation on the stainless steel IUD. Heating measurements showed a temperature increase (rescaled to a wbSAR of 4 W/kg) of 1.4°C at 1.5T / 3.4°C at 3.0 T (stainless steel IUD), 3.2°C at 1.5 T / 3.8°C at 3 T (copper/gold IUD), 3.3°C at 1.5 T / 4.8°C at 3 T (copper 1), 3.8°C at 1.5 T / 4.8°C at 3 T (copper 2). The visible imaging artifacts of the copper and gold IUDs at 3 T MRI reach a diameter of 4 mm ± 1 mm, while the stainless steel IUD resulted in artifacts measuring 200mm ± 10 mm when using gradient echo pulse sequences.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Standard IUDs (copper/gold) can be considered as conditional for MR safety at 1.5 T and 3.0 T, demonstrating at wbSAR up to 4W/kg and a magnetic field gradient of up to 40T/m with minimal imaging artifacts. The stainless steel IUD, however, induces unacceptable artifacts and is potentially harmful to patients during MRI due to high magnetic dislocation forces and torque (MR unsafe).
Version of record
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Intrauterine Devices, Copper
License start date
PloS one, 2018, 13 (10), pp. e0204220 - ?