Towards an integrated radiofrequency safety concept for implant carriers in MRI based on sensor‐equipped implants and parallel transmission

To protect implant carriers in MRI from excessive radiofrequency (RF) heating it has previously been suggested to assess that hazard via sensors on the implant. Other work recommended parallel transmission (pTx) to actively mitigate implant‐related heating. Here, both ideas are integrated into one c...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:NMR in biomedicine 2023-07, Vol.36 (7), p.e4900-n/a
Hauptverfasser: Petzold, Johannes, Schmitter, Sebastian, Silemek, Berk, Winter, Lukas, Speck, Oliver, Ittermann, Bernd, Seifert, Frank
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 7
container_start_page e4900
container_title NMR in biomedicine
container_volume 36
creator Petzold, Johannes
Schmitter, Sebastian
Silemek, Berk
Winter, Lukas
Speck, Oliver
Ittermann, Bernd
Seifert, Frank
description To protect implant carriers in MRI from excessive radiofrequency (RF) heating it has previously been suggested to assess that hazard via sensors on the implant. Other work recommended parallel transmission (pTx) to actively mitigate implant‐related heating. Here, both ideas are integrated into one comprehensive safety concept where native pTx safety (without implant) is ensured by state‐of‐the‐art field simulations and the implant‐specific hazard is quantified in situ using physical sensors. The concept is demonstrated by electromagnetic simulations performed on a human voxel model with a simplified spinal‐cord implant in an eight‐channel pTx body coil at 3T. To integrate implant and native safety, the sensor signal must be calibrated in terms of an established safety metric (e.g., specific absorption rate [SAR]). Virtual experiments show that E‐field and implant‐current sensors are well suited for this purpose, while temperature sensors require some caution, and B1 probes are inadequate. Based on an implant sensor matrix Qs, constructed in situ from sensor readings, and precomputed native SAR limits, a vector space of safe RF excitations is determined where both global (native) and local (implant‐related) safety requirements are satisfied. Within this safe‐excitation subspace, the solution with the best image quality in terms of B1+ magnitude and homogeneity is then found by a straightforward optimization algorithm. In the investigated example, the optimized pTx shim provides a 3‐fold higher meanB1+ magnitude compared with circularly polarized excitation for a maximum implant‐related temperature increase ∆Timp≤1K. To date, sensor‐equipped implants interfaced to a pTx scanner exist as demonstrator items in research labs, but commercial devices are not yet within sight. This paper aims to demonstrate the significant benefits of such an approach and how this could impact implant‐related RF safety in MRI. Today, the responsibility for safe implant scanning lies with the implant manufacturer and the MRI operator; within the sensor concept, the MRI manufacturer would assume much of the operator's current responsibility. To protect patients with active implantable medical devices from radiofrequency‐related hazards in MRI, “native safety” (no implant present, precalculated) and “implant safety” requirements (determined in situ by a sensor on the implant) are combined in a single concept, resulting in safer MRI scans with less performance restrictions.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/nbm.4900
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2763335328</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2825267876</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3830-4c65946693350d24d10aea45fa42c7c9e4c4c2c60f3f9b8dac5ae9a1287624693</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kdFqFDEUhoModm2FPkEJeOPN1EySyU4u29JqoVUo9TqczZwpKTPJ9GSWsne-gOAz-iTN2lVB8Cpw-P4v5_AzdliL41oI-SGuxmNthXjBFrWwtqq1lS_ZQthGVkq3Yo-9yfleCNFqJV-zPWWM1E1jFuz7bXoE6jKHyEOc8Y5gxo4TdCH1hA9rjH7DM_Q4b7hP0eM08z4RD-M0QJy5B6KAlEuaX99c8hXkkk-RZ4w50c9vP4okTFMZ7iLbvzo-AcEw4MBngpjHkHNI8YC96mHI-Hb37rOvF-e3Z5-qqy8fL89OriqvWiUq7U1jtTFWqUZ0Une1AATd9KClX3qL2msvvRG96u2q7cA3gBZq2S7L3SW2z94_eydK5cQ8u7KAx6Gsh2mdnVwaVdxKtgV99w96n9YUy3ZOtrKRZlmkf4WeUs6EvZsojEAbVwu3rciVity2ooIe7YTr1YjdH_B3JwWonoHHMODmvyL3-fT6l_AJlI6dUQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2825267876</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Towards an integrated radiofrequency safety concept for implant carriers in MRI based on sensor‐equipped implants and parallel transmission</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Petzold, Johannes ; Schmitter, Sebastian ; Silemek, Berk ; Winter, Lukas ; Speck, Oliver ; Ittermann, Bernd ; Seifert, Frank</creator><creatorcontrib>Petzold, Johannes ; Schmitter, Sebastian ; Silemek, Berk ; Winter, Lukas ; Speck, Oliver ; Ittermann, Bernd ; Seifert, Frank</creatorcontrib><description>To protect implant carriers in MRI from excessive radiofrequency (RF) heating it has previously been suggested to assess that hazard via sensors on the implant. Other work recommended parallel transmission (pTx) to actively mitigate implant‐related heating. Here, both ideas are integrated into one comprehensive safety concept where native pTx safety (without implant) is ensured by state‐of‐the‐art field simulations and the implant‐specific hazard is quantified in situ using physical sensors. The concept is demonstrated by electromagnetic simulations performed on a human voxel model with a simplified spinal‐cord implant in an eight‐channel pTx body coil at 3T. To integrate implant and native safety, the sensor signal must be calibrated in terms of an established safety metric (e.g., specific absorption rate [SAR]). Virtual experiments show that E‐field and implant‐current sensors are well suited for this purpose, while temperature sensors require some caution, and B1 probes are inadequate. Based on an implant sensor matrix Qs, constructed in situ from sensor readings, and precomputed native SAR limits, a vector space of safe RF excitations is determined where both global (native) and local (implant‐related) safety requirements are satisfied. Within this safe‐excitation subspace, the solution with the best image quality in terms of B1+ magnitude and homogeneity is then found by a straightforward optimization algorithm. In the investigated example, the optimized pTx shim provides a 3‐fold higher meanB1+ magnitude compared with circularly polarized excitation for a maximum implant‐related temperature increase ∆Timp≤1K. To date, sensor‐equipped implants interfaced to a pTx scanner exist as demonstrator items in research labs, but commercial devices are not yet within sight. This paper aims to demonstrate the significant benefits of such an approach and how this could impact implant‐related RF safety in MRI. Today, the responsibility for safe implant scanning lies with the implant manufacturer and the MRI operator; within the sensor concept, the MRI manufacturer would assume much of the operator's current responsibility. To protect patients with active implantable medical devices from radiofrequency‐related hazards in MRI, “native safety” (no implant present, precalculated) and “implant safety” requirements (determined in situ by a sensor on the implant) are combined in a single concept, resulting in safer MRI scans with less performance restrictions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0952-3480</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1099-1492</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/nbm.4900</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36624556</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>active implantable medical devices ; Algorithms ; Biological products ; Circular polarization ; Computer Simulation ; Excitation ; Heating ; Homogeneity ; Hot Temperature ; Human performance ; Humans ; Image quality ; implant safety ; Implants ; Magnetic resonance imaging ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Operators (mathematics) ; Optimization ; parallel transmission ; Phantoms, Imaging ; Radio frequency ; Radio Waves ; RF heating ; Safety ; Sensors ; simulation ; Temperature requirements ; Temperature sensors ; Transplants &amp; implants ; Vector spaces ; virtual sensor</subject><ispartof>NMR in biomedicine, 2023-07, Vol.36 (7), p.e4900-n/a</ispartof><rights>2023 Physikalisch‐Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) and The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023 Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) and The Authors. NMR in Biomedicine published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3830-4c65946693350d24d10aea45fa42c7c9e4c4c2c60f3f9b8dac5ae9a1287624693</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3830-4c65946693350d24d10aea45fa42c7c9e4c4c2c60f3f9b8dac5ae9a1287624693</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9503-0998 ; 0000-0002-7065-2528 ; 0000-0001-8227-3632 ; 0000-0002-6019-5597 ; 0000-0002-4087-471X ; 0000-0003-4410-6790 ; 0000-0002-4381-275X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fnbm.4900$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fnbm.4900$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36624556$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Petzold, Johannes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmitter, Sebastian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silemek, Berk</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Winter, Lukas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Speck, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ittermann, Bernd</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seifert, Frank</creatorcontrib><title>Towards an integrated radiofrequency safety concept for implant carriers in MRI based on sensor‐equipped implants and parallel transmission</title><title>NMR in biomedicine</title><addtitle>NMR Biomed</addtitle><description>To protect implant carriers in MRI from excessive radiofrequency (RF) heating it has previously been suggested to assess that hazard via sensors on the implant. Other work recommended parallel transmission (pTx) to actively mitigate implant‐related heating. Here, both ideas are integrated into one comprehensive safety concept where native pTx safety (without implant) is ensured by state‐of‐the‐art field simulations and the implant‐specific hazard is quantified in situ using physical sensors. The concept is demonstrated by electromagnetic simulations performed on a human voxel model with a simplified spinal‐cord implant in an eight‐channel pTx body coil at 3T. To integrate implant and native safety, the sensor signal must be calibrated in terms of an established safety metric (e.g., specific absorption rate [SAR]). Virtual experiments show that E‐field and implant‐current sensors are well suited for this purpose, while temperature sensors require some caution, and B1 probes are inadequate. Based on an implant sensor matrix Qs, constructed in situ from sensor readings, and precomputed native SAR limits, a vector space of safe RF excitations is determined where both global (native) and local (implant‐related) safety requirements are satisfied. Within this safe‐excitation subspace, the solution with the best image quality in terms of B1+ magnitude and homogeneity is then found by a straightforward optimization algorithm. In the investigated example, the optimized pTx shim provides a 3‐fold higher meanB1+ magnitude compared with circularly polarized excitation for a maximum implant‐related temperature increase ∆Timp≤1K. To date, sensor‐equipped implants interfaced to a pTx scanner exist as demonstrator items in research labs, but commercial devices are not yet within sight. This paper aims to demonstrate the significant benefits of such an approach and how this could impact implant‐related RF safety in MRI. Today, the responsibility for safe implant scanning lies with the implant manufacturer and the MRI operator; within the sensor concept, the MRI manufacturer would assume much of the operator's current responsibility. To protect patients with active implantable medical devices from radiofrequency‐related hazards in MRI, “native safety” (no implant present, precalculated) and “implant safety” requirements (determined in situ by a sensor on the implant) are combined in a single concept, resulting in safer MRI scans with less performance restrictions.</description><subject>active implantable medical devices</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Biological products</subject><subject>Circular polarization</subject><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>Excitation</subject><subject>Heating</subject><subject>Homogeneity</subject><subject>Hot Temperature</subject><subject>Human performance</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image quality</subject><subject>implant safety</subject><subject>Implants</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Operators (mathematics)</subject><subject>Optimization</subject><subject>parallel transmission</subject><subject>Phantoms, Imaging</subject><subject>Radio frequency</subject><subject>Radio Waves</subject><subject>RF heating</subject><subject>Safety</subject><subject>Sensors</subject><subject>simulation</subject><subject>Temperature requirements</subject><subject>Temperature sensors</subject><subject>Transplants &amp; implants</subject><subject>Vector spaces</subject><subject>virtual sensor</subject><issn>0952-3480</issn><issn>1099-1492</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kdFqFDEUhoModm2FPkEJeOPN1EySyU4u29JqoVUo9TqczZwpKTPJ9GSWsne-gOAz-iTN2lVB8Cpw-P4v5_AzdliL41oI-SGuxmNthXjBFrWwtqq1lS_ZQthGVkq3Yo-9yfleCNFqJV-zPWWM1E1jFuz7bXoE6jKHyEOc8Y5gxo4TdCH1hA9rjH7DM_Q4b7hP0eM08z4RD-M0QJy5B6KAlEuaX99c8hXkkk-RZ4w50c9vP4okTFMZ7iLbvzo-AcEw4MBngpjHkHNI8YC96mHI-Hb37rOvF-e3Z5-qqy8fL89OriqvWiUq7U1jtTFWqUZ0Une1AATd9KClX3qL2msvvRG96u2q7cA3gBZq2S7L3SW2z94_eydK5cQ8u7KAx6Gsh2mdnVwaVdxKtgV99w96n9YUy3ZOtrKRZlmkf4WeUs6EvZsojEAbVwu3rciVity2ooIe7YTr1YjdH_B3JwWonoHHMODmvyL3-fT6l_AJlI6dUQ</recordid><startdate>202307</startdate><enddate>202307</enddate><creator>Petzold, Johannes</creator><creator>Schmitter, Sebastian</creator><creator>Silemek, Berk</creator><creator>Winter, Lukas</creator><creator>Speck, Oliver</creator><creator>Ittermann, Bernd</creator><creator>Seifert, Frank</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9503-0998</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7065-2528</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8227-3632</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6019-5597</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4087-471X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4410-6790</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4381-275X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202307</creationdate><title>Towards an integrated radiofrequency safety concept for implant carriers in MRI based on sensor‐equipped implants and parallel transmission</title><author>Petzold, Johannes ; Schmitter, Sebastian ; Silemek, Berk ; Winter, Lukas ; Speck, Oliver ; Ittermann, Bernd ; Seifert, Frank</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3830-4c65946693350d24d10aea45fa42c7c9e4c4c2c60f3f9b8dac5ae9a1287624693</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>active implantable medical devices</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Biological products</topic><topic>Circular polarization</topic><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>Excitation</topic><topic>Heating</topic><topic>Homogeneity</topic><topic>Hot Temperature</topic><topic>Human performance</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image quality</topic><topic>implant safety</topic><topic>Implants</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Operators (mathematics)</topic><topic>Optimization</topic><topic>parallel transmission</topic><topic>Phantoms, Imaging</topic><topic>Radio frequency</topic><topic>Radio Waves</topic><topic>RF heating</topic><topic>Safety</topic><topic>Sensors</topic><topic>simulation</topic><topic>Temperature requirements</topic><topic>Temperature sensors</topic><topic>Transplants &amp; implants</topic><topic>Vector spaces</topic><topic>virtual sensor</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Petzold, Johannes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmitter, Sebastian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silemek, Berk</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Winter, Lukas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Speck, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ittermann, Bernd</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seifert, Frank</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>NMR in biomedicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Petzold, Johannes</au><au>Schmitter, Sebastian</au><au>Silemek, Berk</au><au>Winter, Lukas</au><au>Speck, Oliver</au><au>Ittermann, Bernd</au><au>Seifert, Frank</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Towards an integrated radiofrequency safety concept for implant carriers in MRI based on sensor‐equipped implants and parallel transmission</atitle><jtitle>NMR in biomedicine</jtitle><addtitle>NMR Biomed</addtitle><date>2023-07</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e4900</spage><epage>n/a</epage><pages>e4900-n/a</pages><issn>0952-3480</issn><eissn>1099-1492</eissn><abstract>To protect implant carriers in MRI from excessive radiofrequency (RF) heating it has previously been suggested to assess that hazard via sensors on the implant. Other work recommended parallel transmission (pTx) to actively mitigate implant‐related heating. Here, both ideas are integrated into one comprehensive safety concept where native pTx safety (without implant) is ensured by state‐of‐the‐art field simulations and the implant‐specific hazard is quantified in situ using physical sensors. The concept is demonstrated by electromagnetic simulations performed on a human voxel model with a simplified spinal‐cord implant in an eight‐channel pTx body coil at 3T. To integrate implant and native safety, the sensor signal must be calibrated in terms of an established safety metric (e.g., specific absorption rate [SAR]). Virtual experiments show that E‐field and implant‐current sensors are well suited for this purpose, while temperature sensors require some caution, and B1 probes are inadequate. Based on an implant sensor matrix Qs, constructed in situ from sensor readings, and precomputed native SAR limits, a vector space of safe RF excitations is determined where both global (native) and local (implant‐related) safety requirements are satisfied. Within this safe‐excitation subspace, the solution with the best image quality in terms of B1+ magnitude and homogeneity is then found by a straightforward optimization algorithm. In the investigated example, the optimized pTx shim provides a 3‐fold higher meanB1+ magnitude compared with circularly polarized excitation for a maximum implant‐related temperature increase ∆Timp≤1K. To date, sensor‐equipped implants interfaced to a pTx scanner exist as demonstrator items in research labs, but commercial devices are not yet within sight. This paper aims to demonstrate the significant benefits of such an approach and how this could impact implant‐related RF safety in MRI. Today, the responsibility for safe implant scanning lies with the implant manufacturer and the MRI operator; within the sensor concept, the MRI manufacturer would assume much of the operator's current responsibility. To protect patients with active implantable medical devices from radiofrequency‐related hazards in MRI, “native safety” (no implant present, precalculated) and “implant safety” requirements (determined in situ by a sensor on the implant) are combined in a single concept, resulting in safer MRI scans with less performance restrictions.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>36624556</pmid><doi>10.1002/nbm.4900</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9503-0998</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7065-2528</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8227-3632</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6019-5597</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4087-471X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4410-6790</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4381-275X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0952-3480
ispartof NMR in biomedicine, 2023-07, Vol.36 (7), p.e4900-n/a
issn 0952-3480
1099-1492
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2763335328
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects active implantable medical devices
Algorithms
Biological products
Circular polarization
Computer Simulation
Excitation
Heating
Homogeneity
Hot Temperature
Human performance
Humans
Image quality
implant safety
Implants
Magnetic resonance imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods
Operators (mathematics)
Optimization
parallel transmission
Phantoms, Imaging
Radio frequency
Radio Waves
RF heating
Safety
Sensors
simulation
Temperature requirements
Temperature sensors
Transplants & implants
Vector spaces
virtual sensor
title Towards an integrated radiofrequency safety concept for implant carriers in MRI based on sensor‐equipped implants and parallel transmission
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T23%3A12%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Towards%20an%20integrated%20radiofrequency%20safety%20concept%20for%20implant%20carriers%20in%20MRI%20based%20on%20sensor%E2%80%90equipped%20implants%20and%20parallel%20transmission&rft.jtitle=NMR%20in%20biomedicine&rft.au=Petzold,%20Johannes&rft.date=2023-07&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e4900&rft.epage=n/a&rft.pages=e4900-n/a&rft.issn=0952-3480&rft.eissn=1099-1492&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/nbm.4900&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2825267876%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2825267876&rft_id=info:pmid/36624556&rfr_iscdi=true