• Joseph D Femino, Samuel R Barnes, Scott C Nelson, and Lee M Zuckerman.
• Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, 1520 San Pablo St., Suite 2000, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA.
• Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Apr 1; 144 (4): 150315091503-1509.

IntroductionThe use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with a magnetic intramedullary lengthening nail in place is contraindicated per the manufacturer due to the concern of implant activation and migration. A prior in vitro study did not confirm these complications only noting that a 3.0 T MRI weakened the internal magnet. Therefore, a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent an MRI with a magnetic nail in place was performed to determine if any adverse effects occurred in the clinical setting.Materials And MethodsA retrospective review of all patients who underwent an MRI with a magnetic lengthening nail in place was performed. The time spent being imaged in the MRI, number of times the patient entered the MRI suite, and the images obtained were recorded. Radiographs were performed before and after the MRI to determine if any hardware complications occurred. The patients were monitored for any adverse symptoms while they were in the suite.ResultsA total of 12 patients with 13 nails were identified. Two patients underwent imaging with a 3.0 T MRI while the remaining 10 underwent imaging with a 1.5 T MRI. Each patient entered the MRI suite 2.1 times and spent an average of 84.7 min being imaged in the MRI (range 21-494). No patients noted any adverse symptoms related to the nail while in the suite and no hardware complications were identified.ConclusionMRI appears to be safe with a magnetic nail in place and did not result in any complications. Given the manufacturer's recommendations, informed consent should be obtained prior to an MRI being performed and a 3.0 T MRI should be avoided when possible if further activation of the nail is required.© 2024. The Author(s).

21 keywords...

hide…