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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | NMR in biomedicine 2023-07, Vol.36 (7), p.e4900-n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
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 & 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 & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023 Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) and The Authors. NMR in Biomedicine published by John Wiley & 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 & 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 & 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 |