4.3 Article

IEEE Committee on Man and Radiation (COMAR) Technical Information Statement exposure of medical personnel to electromagnetic fields from open magnetic resonance imaging systems

期刊

HEALTH PHYSICS
卷 89, 期 6, 页码 684-689

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.HP.0000172545.71238.15

关键词

magnetic resonance imaging; exposure; radiofrequency; magnetic fields; safety standards

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Open magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems enable performing image-guided medical procedures for long periods of time very close to, or inside, the patient imaging area. Medical personnel can be exposed to relatively high static, gradient, and radiofrequency fields compared to most other MRI systems. The Committee on Man and Radiation of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers calculated or used existing data on magnetic flux densities and field strengths in or near the patient area to assess occupational exposure levels. Potential exposures to each field type were analyzed and compared to relevant values specified in international exposure limits including those of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the International Commission on Nonionizing Radiation Protection. Exposures of the head or torso of a worker to gradient fields near the center of the patient-imaging area can exceed most exposure limits even for times less than a second. Exposures to radiofrequency fields can exceed limits if sustained exposures (minutes or more) occur to parts of the body. Static magnetic fields used by present Opm MRI systems are below exposure limits of all of the standards that address these fields. Overall results of this study suggest that manufacturers and others who program or operate Open MRI systems should take care to ensure that operating parameters produce exposures that comply with the relevant exposure limits. Also, since field levels fall off rapidly with increasing distance, user practices may be implemented that reduce exposures significantly.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据