The Bioeffects of Static Magnetic Fields

The introduction of MR technology as a clinical imaging modality in the early 1980s is responsible for a substantial increase in human exposure to strong static magnetic fields. Most MR systems in use today operate at fields ranging from 0.2- to 3-Tesla. 


According to the latest guidelines from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, clinical MR systems using static magnetic fields up to 8.0-Tesla are considered a “non-significant risk” for adult patients. The exposure of research subjects to fields above this level requires approval of the research protocol by an Institutional Review Board and the informed consent of the subjects. 


Currently, the most powerful MR system used for human subjects operates at 9.4-Tesla, but there are plans to develop even higher field strength scanners. Several investigations now describe physiologic findings obtained in human subjects, including volunteers, patients, and workers relative to exposures to the 9.4-Tesla MR system. For the short-term exposures experienced by volunteers and patients, no readily demonstrated health risks were identified. However, a study conducted to evaluate sensory symptoms and vestibular function in workers exposed to the 9.4-Tesla MR system revealed that all participants noted sensory symptoms related to the exposure. The investigators concluded that, while the workers experienced sensory symptoms, it is unclear whether long-term vestibular damage or other changes occur. The higher rates of vestibular changes may argue for improved worker surveillance and exposure control.


With respect to short-term exposures, the available information that pertains to the effects of static magnetic fields on biological tissues is extensive. Investigations include studies on alterations in cell growth and morphology, cell reproduction and teratogenicity, DNA structure and gene expression, pre- and post-natal reproduction and development, blood brain barrier permeability, nerve activity, cognitive function and behavior, cardiovascular dynamics, hematological indices, temperature regulation, circadian rhythms, immune responsiveness, processing of visual and auditory information by the brain, and other biological processes. The majority of these studies concluded that exposures to static magnetic fields produce no substantial harmful bioeffects. Although there have been reports of potentially injurious effects of static magnetic fields on isolated cells or organisms, no effect has been verified or firmly established as a scientific fact. The documented serious injuries and few fatalities that have occurred with MR system magnets were in associated with the inadvertent introduction or presence of ferromagnetic objects (e.g., oxygen tanks, wheelchairs, aneurysm clips, etc.) into the MR environment.



Regarding the effects of long-term exposures to static magnetic fields, there are several physical mechanisms of interaction between tissues and static magnetic fields that could theoretically lead to pathological changes in human subjects. However, quantitative analysis of these mechanisms indicates that they are below the threshold of significance with respect to long-term adverse bioeffects. 



Presently, the peer-reviewed literature does not contain carefully controlled studies that support the absolute safety of chronic exposure to powerful magnetic fields. With the increased clinical use of interventional MR procedures, there is a critical need for such investigations. In addition, although there is no evidence for a cumulative effect of magnetic field exposure on health, further studies of the exposed populations (MR healthcare professionals, patients that undergo repeat studies, interventional MR users, etc.) will be helpful in establishing guidelines for occupational and patient exposures to powerful static magnetic fields.

Popular posts from this blog

PG Doctors of India must work not more than 48 Hr/week: SC

Image
As per the directives of the Honourable Supreme Court in its judgment dated,25.9.87, in writ petition No. 348-352 of 1985, all the State Governments, Medical Institutions and Universities are required to amend their rules and regulations to introduce a uniform residency scheme by 1993 “A uniform practice has to be evolved so that the discipline would be introduced. We accordingly allow the present arrangement to continue for a period of five yearsI.e. upto 1992 inclusive. For admission beginning from 1993 there would be only onepattern. All Universities and institutions shall take timely steps to bring about such amendments as may be necessary to bring statutes, regulations, and rules obtaining in their respective institutions in accord with this direction before the end of 1991 so that there may be no scope for raising of any dispute in regard to the matter.The uniform pattern has to be implemented for 1993. It is proper that one uniform system is brought into vogue throughout
Read more

Why DNB exam tougher than MS/MD exam?

Image
Guest article by Dr Kalyan R Kone   There were 6 people (accompanied by their relatives) sitting in the small waiting room outside the ward waiting for their call inside. They looked battered, tense and had such a depressed look in their eyes that even Shylock would have sympathized with them. They had cleared their DNB (Diplomate of National Board) theory exam and were making last minute preparations for their practical exam. If I were not told that they were all Doctors, I would have thought that they were all waiting for their turn to see a psychiatrist. Dr Kalyan R Kone Five out of six of those waiting doctors were appearing for the second or third time. In spite of that, they didn’t know what would be in store for them except one thing — only one or two would pass out of the six candidates. I thought for a moment that it was a good ploy by the NBE (National Board of Examination) to generate funds – after all, where would these poor guys go except appe
Read more