Your browser does not support JavaScript!

Evaluation of local B 1 field as dosimeter of RF heating for implant in MRI

Evaluation of local B 1 field as dosimeter of RF heating for implant in MRI

For access to this article, please select a purchase option:

Buy article PDF
(plus tax if applicable)
Buy Knowledge Pack
10 articles for $120.00
(plus taxes if applicable)

IET members benefit from discounts to all IET publications and free access to E&T Magazine. If you are an IET member, log in to your account and the discounts will automatically be applied.

Learn more about IET membership 

Recommend Title Publication to library

You must fill out fields marked with: *

Librarian details
Your details
Why are you recommending this title?
Select reason:
Electronics Letters — Recommend this title to your library

Thank you

Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

Radio frequency (RF) heating is a serious risk for a patient with an elongated implant during MRI scan. The conventional dosimeter of specific absorption rate (SAR) and the recently proposed B 1+rms may not accurately indicate the implant heating. The local B 1 field around the tip of a lead and its relationship with the RF heating were studied by numerical simulations. It was found that regardless of the route of the lead, the angle or position of placement, there was a strong linear correlation between the averaged square of local B 1 field and the rise in temperature. The evaluation range had an effect on the linearity. Generally, the local B 1 field performed better as a dosimeter of RF heating than SAR or B 1+rms at the isocentre.


    1. 1)
      • 5. Milne, A.A.: ‘Current issues in MRI safety’, in Anthony, B. (Ed.): ‘Advances in medical physics’ (Medical Physics Publishing, Madison, WI, USA, 2012), pp. 195203.
    2. 2)
    3. 3)
      • 3. Faulkner, W.: ‘New MRI safety labels & devices’, Signals, 2016, 5, (1), available at
    4. 4)
      • 7. ASTM F2182-11a: ‘Standard test method for measurement of radio frequency induced heating on or near passive implants during magnetic resonance imaging’, 2011.
    5. 5)
    6. 6)
    7. 7)
    8. 8)

Related content

This article has following corresponding article(s):
Beside the point
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address