FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4387492791> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4387492791 abstract "Purpose of the Study Stroke is a leading cause of mortality in patients supported by left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) and a contraindication for cardiac transplantation in several centers.1–3 Early detection of stroke is crucial in the management of these patients, which may potentially improve their clinical outcomes. Portable low-field brain magnetic resonance imaging (pMRI) has been shown to be safe for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients, even with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or Swan Ganz catheter (SGC); however, its safety in LVAD patients is untested.4,5 In this study, we aimed to determine the compatibility of this innovative technology with the HeartMate3 (HM3) LVADs. Main Results We present the first known demonstration of pMRI use with a phantom model HM3 LVAD (Abbott Laboratories, Pleasanton, CA). Portable low-field brain magnetic resonance imaging was performed using a 64 mT Swoop MR imaging system (Hyperfine, Inc., Guilford, CT). The MR system was positioned with controllers outside the magnet’s 5 Gauss (5G) safety line (Figure 1). After this, the site quality assurance (SQA) phantom, used to mimic the brain and allow image quality assessment, was placed into the head coil of the scanner.Figure 1.: Map of the static magnetic field and the locations of HM3 LVAD placement. LVAD, left ventricular assist device.We placed the LVAD into a container filled with approximately 1 L of water in it, completely submerging the pump. To accurately determine the effect of the magnetic field on the device, we placed the electrical controller next to the container (see Figure 1, Supplemental Digital Content, https://links.lww.com/ASAIO/B110). We then placed this setup at three distinct distances from the center of the scanner. The three locations (Figure 1) were at 180 cm (outside the 5G boundary) to record the baseline parameters, at 80 cm (at the 5G boundary) (see Figure 1, Supplemental Digital Content, https://links.lww.com/ASAIO/B110), and at 40 cm (inside the 5G boundary), a distance that mimics in vivo LVAD positioning. We selected these locations to assess a) the impact on the LVAD of the increasing magnetic field strength as we moved the device toward the center of the scanner and b) the effect of LVAD on the quality of the SQA scan. At each distance, we assessed predetermined LVAD parameters of function and performed scans of the SQA phantom to determine image quality. The primary outcomes were the safety and feasibility of pMRI at clinically relevant distances of an HM3 LVAD phantom from the center of the scanner. Left ventricular assist device function was assessed by significant changes in pump speed, pump flow, power, and printed circuit board temperature (PCBT). Imaging was assessed by evaluating SQA imaging quality with both diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and transverse relaxation time (T2) sequences. We chose DWI and T2 protocols as they have been shown to provide clear delineation of alterations in brain tissue and hence, their applicability in the clinical setting. We eliminated T1 sequence as this decreased scanning time without loss of image sensitivity. Images generated at 180 cm were used as the baseline dataset against which the images obtained at the other locations were compared for radiofrequency noise artifact. Quantitative analysis was not performed as the LVAD was deemed to be unsafe. At 180 cm, the magnetic field was less than 5G, within an order of magnitude of the Earth’s field strength. At this point, we recorded the baseline LVAD parameters in the absence of exposure to radiofrequency waves, i.e., with the scanner turned off (Table 1) followed by generation of DWI and T2-W images of the SQA phantom. No LVAD parameters were affected and the image quality of the SQA was perfect with no distortions. Table 1. - Device Parameters Recorded at Different Locations Distance (From the Center of Scanner) Pump Speed (rpm) Pump Flow (L/min) Power (W) PCBT 180 cm (scanner off) 5,400 3.3 3.4 29 180 cm (on) 5,400 3.3 3.4 30 80 cm (on) 5,400 3.3 3.4 31 40 cm (on) 0 0 21 35 PCBT, printed circuit board temperature. We then moved the device to 80 cm (at the 5G boundary) (Figure 1). The 5G boundary, roughly 10× the Earth’s magnetic field, is considered the transition zone to a potentially significant magnetic field. At this location, LVAD parameters and the SQA imaging were unperturbed. We considered 40 cm, with a magnetic field of 200G (Figure 1), as the position corresponding to the location in the human body where the HM3 LVAD would be expected, representing a true reflection of the impact of the magnetic field on the HM3. At this point, the HM3 ceased to function, with pump speed and pump flow dropping to zero. The power, which represents the current required to maintain the motor’s RPMs and fluid flow, increased, from 3.4 W at 80 cm to 21 W at 40 cm, representing the increased workload of the device as its mechanism was impacted by the stronger magnetic field. The device PCBT rose from 31, the temperature seen at 80 cm to 35 with the HM3 at 40 cm (Table 1). This rise in PCBT was not significant as per the company’s guidelines for the device as the normal PCBT for patients can be seen anywhere from the mid-40s to mid-50s. True heating is when PCBT is in the range of 70s. Therefore, circuit heating was excluded as a cause of device malfunction. Importantly, the SQA images obtained at this location showed no distortions or artifacts. We anticipate that patients with a decommissioned (nonfunctioning) device, i.e., in the case of cardiac remission, or even an LVAD stopped temporarily for the pMRI procedure for patients who might tolerate such, may be considered for a pMRI as the image quality was unaffected by the proximity of the device. However, because the device would be implanted, there could be a trauma risk due to unintended movement of the implanted device and the magnetic field might interact with the integrity of the pump. Conventional MRI relies on high-strength magnetic fields (1.5–3T) and is incompatible with the ECMO circuit and LVADs due to magnetic torque on the pump leading to resistance to spinning, heating, and, possible device migration. It was hypothesized that pMRI, with a field 1/50th as strong as the conventional MRI, would be compatible with the LVAD, allowing sensitive brain imaging of these patients, even in a critical care setting.4 However, our study shows that the HM3 is incompatible even with this lower field strength. The fully magnetically levitated HM3 rotor most certainly represents a key vulnerability, increasingly misaligned with increasing external magnetic field exposure. The magnetic interference pulled the rotor to the side of the pump, and the rotor was unable to keep itself centered and levitated to spin at the set pump speed, which led to the device’s malfunctioning. However, because this configuration was experimental and the pump was not inside a human with a patient’s heart, other organs, or chest wall to act as a shield, this may have changed how the magnetic field affected the device’s parameters. Therefore, future research is required to ascertain this interaction using translational research trials or ex-vivo heart models. In conclusion, positioned at what would be a real-life distance from the center of this pMRI magnet, the HM3 did not function, exhibiting an incompatibility with the magnet. However, imaging did not seem to be impacted by the device, with scans showing good image quality unaffected by LVAD proximity. Through this experiment, we demonstrated that patients with HM3 cannot be assessed for neurologic injury even with pMRI; as a result, brain computed tomography (CT) scan, although being a less sensitive modality to identify strokes, is hitherto the only reliable neurologic imaging test in LVAD patients." @default.
• W4387492791 created "2023-10-11" @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5000087766 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5009073133 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5018168347 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5020863608 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5030964955 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5050437153 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5059206221 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5082078121 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5092093737 @default.
• W4387492791 creator A5093035142 @default.
• W4387492791 date "2023-10-11" @default.
• W4387492791 modified "2023-10-12" @default.
• W4387492791 title "Assessing the Safety and Feasibility of Portable Low-Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging With HeartMate 3 Left Ventricular Assist Device" @default.
• W4387492791 cites W2010014339 @default.
• W4387492791 cites W3183702578 @default.
• W4387492791 cites W3200309890 @default.
• W4387492791 cites W4225265590 @default.
• W4387492791 cites W4309736755 @default.
• W4387492791 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/mat.0000000000002061" @default.
• W4387492791 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37816009" @default.
• W4387492791 hasPublicationYear "2023" @default.
• W4387492791 type Work @default.
• W4387492791 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4387492791 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5000087766 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5009073133 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5018168347 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5020863608 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5030964955 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5050437153 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5059206221 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5082078121 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5092093737 @default.
• W4387492791 hasAuthorship W4387492791A5093035142 @default.
• W4387492791 hasBestOaLocation W43874927911 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConcept C143409427 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConcept C2778198053 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConcept C2778774980 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConcept C46141821 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConceptScore W4387492791C121332964 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConceptScore W4387492791C126838900 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConceptScore W4387492791C143409427 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConceptScore W4387492791C164705383 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConceptScore W4387492791C2778198053 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConceptScore W4387492791C2778774980 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConceptScore W4387492791C46141821 @default.
• W4387492791 hasConceptScore W4387492791C71924100 @default.
• W4387492791 hasLocation W43874927911 @default.
• W4387492791 hasLocation W43874927912 @default.
• W4387492791 hasOpenAccess W4387492791 @default.
• W4387492791 hasPrimaryLocation W43874927911 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W1531601525 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W2758277628 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W2948807893 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W3173606202 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W3183948672 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W4387497383 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W2778153218 @default.
• W4387492791 hasRelatedWork W3110381201 @default.
• W4387492791 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4387492791 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4387492791 workType "article" @default.