Safety of Simultaneous Scalp and Intracranial EEG and fMRI: Evaluation of RF-Induced Heating

Le résumé fourni par la source

The acquisition of electroencephalography (EEG) concurrently with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) requires a careful consideration of the health hazards resulting from interactions between the scanner's electromagnetic fields and EEG recording equipment. The primary safety concern is excessive RF-induced heating of the tissue in the vicinity of electrodes. We have previously demonstrated that concurrent intracranial EEG (icEEG) and fMRI data acquisitions (icEEG-fMRI) can be performed with acceptable risk in specific conditions using a head RF transmit coil. Here, we estimate the potential additional heating associated with the addition of scalp EEG electrodes using a body transmit RF coil. In this study, electrodes were placed in clinically realistic positions on a phantom in two configurations: (1) icEEG electrodes only, and (2) following the addition of subdermal scalp electrodes. Heating was measured during MRI scans using a body transmit coil with a high specific absorption rate (SAR), TSE (turbo spin echo), and low SAR gradient-echo EPI (echo-planar imaging) sequences. During the application of the high-SAR sequence, the maximum temperature change for the intracranial electrodes was +2.8 °C. The addition of the subdural scalp EEG electrodes resulted in a maximum temperature change for the intracranial electrodes of 2.1 °C and +0.6 °C across the scalp electrodes. For the low-SAR sequence, the maximum temperature increase across all intracranial and scalp electrodes was +0.7 °C; in this condition, the temperature increases around the intracranial electrodes were below the detection level. Therefore, in the experimental conditions (MRI scanner, electrode, and wire configurations) used at our centre for icEEG-fMRI, adding six scalp EEG electrodes did not result in significant additional localised RF-induced heating compared to the model using icEEG electrodes only.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.