Stimulation threshold comparison of time-varying magnetic pulses with different waveforms

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 229-236

  Irnich, Werner ^a   Hebrank, Franz X ^b  

^a JUSTUS LIEBIG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b SIEMENS AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Effective pulse duration; Fundamental law of electrostimulation; Magnetostimulation; Rheobase condition; Sinusoidal pulses; Trapezoidal pulses

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRIC FIELD; ELECTROSTIMULATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NERVE STIMULATION; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTIVE THRESHOLD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PULSE WAVE;

ACTION POTENTIALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DIFFERENTIAL THRESHOLD; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, RADIATION; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; HUMANS; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; PERIPHERAL NERVES; RADIATION DOSAGE;

EID: 60349083833     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21573     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. International standard of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), IEC 60601-2-33 Ed. 2.0, 2002. Medical electrical equipment - part 2-33: Particular requirements for the safety of magnetic resonance equipment for medical diagnosis.
2. Schmitt F, Irnich W, Fischer H. Physiological side effects of fast gradient switching. In: Schmitt F, Stehling MK, Turner R, editors. Echo-planar imaging - theory, technique and application. Heidelberg: Springer; 1998. p 201-252.
3. Schaefer DJ, Bourland JD, Nyenhuis JA. Review of patient safety in time-varying gradient fields. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:20-29.
4. Irnich W. Electrostimulation by time-varying magnetic fields. MAGMA 1994;2:43-49.
5. Reilly JP. Applied bioelectricity - from electrical stimulation to electropathology. New York: Springer; 1998. p 131, 370.
6. Lapicque L. Definition expérimental de l'excitabilité. Soc Biol 1909;77:280-283.
7. Den Boer JA, Bourland JD, Nyenhuis JA, et al. Comparison of the threshold for peripheral nerve stimulation during gradient switching in whole body MR systems. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;15:520-525.
8. Chronik BA, Rutt BK. A comparison between human magnetostimulation thresholds in whole-body and head / neck gradient coils. Magn Res Med 2001;46:386-394.
9. Bencsik M, Bowtell R, Bowley RM. Using the vector potential in evaluating the likelihood of peripheral nerve stimulation due to switched magnetic field gradients. Magn Res Med 2003;50:405-410.
10. Brand M, Heid O. Induction of electric fields due to gradient switching: a numerical approach. Magn Res Med 2002;48:731-734.
11. Irnich W, Schmitt F. Magnetostimulation in MRI. Magn Res Med 1995;3:619-623.
12. Blair HA. On the intensity-time relations for stimulation by electric currents. Part I. J Gen Physiol 1932;15:709-729.
13. Irnich W. The fundamental law of electrostimulation and its application to defibrillation. PACE 1990;13:1433-1447.
14. Hebrank FX, Gebhardt M. SAFE model - a new method for predicting peripheral nerve stimulation in MRI. In: Proc 8th Annual Meeting ISMRM, Denver, 2000. p 2007.
15. Irnich W, Irnich B, Bartsch C, Stertmann WA, Gufler H, Weiler G. Do we need pacemakers resistant to magnetic resonance imaging? Europace 2005;7:353-365.
16. Irnich W. Optimal truncation of defibrillation pulses. PACE 1995;18:673-688.
17. Irnich W. Das Experimentum Crucis der Elektrostimulation. Biomed Technik 2004;49(Suppl):488-489.
18. Yamagata H, Kuhara S, Seo Y, Sato K, Hiwaki O, Ueno S. Evaluation of dB/dt thresholds for nerve stimulation elicited by trapezoidal and sinusoidal gradient fields in echo-planar imaging. Proc Soc Magn Reson Med 1991, WIP. p 1277.
19. Harvey PR, Mansfield P. Avoiding peripheral nerve stimulation: gradient waveform criteria for optimum resolution in echo-planar imaging. Magn Reson Med 1994;32:236-241.
20. Lapicque L. Sur l'excitation électrique des nerfes traitée comme une polarisation. J Physiol Pathol Gen 1907;49:620-635.