» Articles » PMID: 33219927

Failure of SCS MR-Conditional Modes Due to High Impedance: A Review of Literature and Case Series

Overview
Journal Pain Ther
Date 2020 Nov 21
PMID 33219927
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) conditional modes are a novel feature for certain Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved spinal cord stimulation (SCS) devices. However, there is a paucity of literature around the limitation of MRI-conditional modes ("MRI safe"), specifically in clinical scenarios where urgent MRIs may be needed. One such limitation is load impedance, referring to the circuit's resistance to the current being generated by the system. High impedance can limit the MRI-conditional mode capability, presenting potential harm to a patient undergoing an MRI or make an MRI unable to be completed.

Methods: Three cases were identified, and informed consent was obtained. All information was obtained via retrospective chart review.

Results: In this case series of three patients where MRI-conditional SCS systems were unable to be placed in "MRI safe" settings, preventing timely MRI study completion in the setting of high impedance, all three were required to undergo alternative imaging including CT scans, and two patients ultimately had the system explanted and one chose to be re-implanted after completion of scans.

Conclusion: This case series highlights the need for further investigation of impedance in SCS systems and potential limitations for future MRI usage. The review of literature of impedance in SCS shows both device- and physiologic-related etiologies for changes in impedance that warrant consideration by the implanting physician.

Citing Articles

MR-conditionality failure modes: a comparison across various spinal cord stimulators.

Fisher K, Jenkins T, Singh V, Li R, Qadri Y Pain Manag. 2024; 14(8):431-435.

PMID: 39269183 PMC: 11487941. DOI: 10.1080/17581869.2024.2400970.


Neuromodulation Techniques in Chronic Refractory Coccydynia: A Narrative Review.

Rahimibarghani S, Morgan R, Diaz J Pain Ther. 2024; 13(1):53-67.

PMID: 38175492 PMC: 10796902. DOI: 10.1007/s40122-023-00572-4.


Bioheat Model of Spinal Column Heating During High-Density Spinal Cord Stimulation.

Zannou A, Khadka N, Bikson M Neuromodulation. 2022; 26(7):1362-1370.

PMID: 36030146 PMC: 9950282. DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.07.006.


Patient Selection for Spinal Cord Stimulation in Treatment of Pain: Sequential Decision-Making Model - A Narrative Review.

Goudman L, Rigoard P, Billot M, Duarte R, Eldabe S, Moens M J Pain Res. 2022; 15:1163-1171.

PMID: 35478997 PMC: 9035681. DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S250455.

References
1.
Jotwani R, Mehta N, Baig E, Gupta A, Gulati A . Neuromodulation and the Epidemiology of Magnetic Resonance Utilization for Lung, Breast, Colon, and Prostate Cancer. Neuromodulation. 2020; 23(7):912-921. DOI: 10.1111/ner.13224. View

3.
Sayed D, Chakravarthy K, Amirdelfan K, Kalia H, Meacham K, Shirvalkar P . A Comprehensive Practice Guideline for Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compatibility in Implanted Neuromodulation Devices. Neuromodulation. 2020; 23(7):893-911. DOI: 10.1111/ner.13233. View

4.
Rubino S, Adepoju A, Kumar V, Prusik J, Murphy N, Owusu-Sarpong S . MRI Conditionality in Patients with Spinal Cord Stimulation Devices. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2016; 94(4):254-258. DOI: 10.1159/000448764. View

5.
Abejon D, Feler C . Is impedance a parameter to be taken into account in spinal cord stimulation?. Pain Physician. 2007; 10(4):533-40. View

6.
Lempka S, Johnson M, Miocinovic S, Vitek J, McIntyre C . Current-controlled deep brain stimulation reduces in vivo voltage fluctuations observed during voltage-controlled stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol. 2010; 121(12):2128-33. PMC: 2928413. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2010.04.026. View