Safety of 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Active Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation Device for Facial Pain.

Overview

1. Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
2. Krembil Brain Institute, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
3. Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
4. Austin Hospital, Austin Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
5. Physical Sciences Platform, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
6. Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
7. Department of Neuroradiology, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
8. Department of Neurosurgery, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
9. Department of Medical Biophysics, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
10. Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
11. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California Irvine, Orange County, CA, USA

Abstract

Introduction: Peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) for facial pain delivers subcutaneous electrical stimulation to reduce pain. Blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) functional MRI (fMRI) can be used to characterize central effects of neuromodulation techniques such as deep brain stimulation and spinal cord stimulation (SCS). However, the safety and utility of MRI in patients with PNFS have not been established, limiting both clinical MRI use and the application of fMRI in this population. This study evaluated the MRI safety and feasibility of imaging an active SCS implant used for PNFS in patients with facial pain; and defined sequence parameters for concurrent BOLD fMRI acquisition.

Methods: An anthropomorphic 3D-printed phantom filled with tissue-mimicking gel and fitted with an SCS implant replicating a patient with PNFS was used for in vitro safety testing. Two phantom experiments evaluated the relationship between (i) head-averaged specific absorption rate (SAR), (ii) time-averaged positive radiofrequency magnetic field component (B1rms+) and maximal temperature rises at critical locations (i.e., distal lead electrodes, cranial coiling, and implantable pulse generator) across clinical and research-based structural and fMRI sequences. For validation, a PNFS patient was scanned using localizer, T1-weighted magnetization-prepared rapid gradient echo, T2-weighted sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts using different flip angle evolutions, and BOLD fMRI sequences informed by phantom experiments.

Results: FMRI during active PNFS is safe under specific conditions, with temperature increases remaining below the 2°C threshold at all monitored locations. Heating had a stronger relationship with head SAR (higher adjusted coefficient of determination [R2] value) than B1rms+, particularly at distal lead electrodes. These in vitro findings informed selection of safe fMRI protocols for in vivo scanning. A patient (n = 1) underwent MRI with no device- or patient-related adverse events. Successful fMRI acquisition was achieved, demonstrating engagement of pain-related regions in the patient.

Conclusion: Phantom testing confirmed the safety and feasibility of MRI with an active SCS device configured for facial PNFS. These findings, specific to the tested conditions, underscore the need for context-specific safety evaluations to enable safe MRI in such implantable medical devices.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY-NC), from the paper cited above.

Code

No file of the authors' code could be read here: it is described below, and read at its source.

Tracing map

Proposed by the machine: these links were found in the paper and verified at the source, without human review. The map will receive a Zenodo DOI once one of the paper's authors has validated it with their ORCID.

What the map holds:

• 1 repository of the authors' code, each at its verified commit, with its license and how the link was found in the paper;
• 0 scripts, each with its path and the digest of its content;
• no match between paragraphs and code yet;
• neither the text of the paper nor the code itself.

Its JSON (tracing-map.json) is deposited on Zenodo with its DOI once the map is validated.

Data

Datasets cited

• figshare:31933284 — at figshare; found in DataCite

Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analyzed in this study are included in this article and online supplementary material files. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY-NC), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 29 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, pages, dates, 19 authors, 5 keywords, 31 references.

Cite

This paper

Chow, C. T., Sarica, C., Yang, B., Santyr, B., Ludovichetti, R., Pourhossein, K., Kashyap, S., Colditz, M., Loh, A., Germann, J., Naheed, A., Vetkas, A., Uludağ, K., Iorio-Morin, C., Paff, M., Graham, S. J., Boutet, A., Lozano, A. M., & Hodaie, M. (2026). Safety of 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Active Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation Device for Facial Pain. Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1159/000551467

The tracing map gets a citation of its own once an author has validated it and it has a DOI.

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-71555-0 [code]

A deep representation learning model to predict response to vagus nerve stimulation.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: clinical / translational, 1 reference, 2 authors

[2] doi:10.1073/pnas.2604111123 [code]

Multiscale characterization of the human claustrum from histology to MRI.

Journal: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

In common: author Sriranga Kashyap

[3] doi:10.1126/sciadv.aeb5842 [code]

Regulation of autism-related self-injurious behavior by electrical stimulation of corticostriatal circuits in mice and humans.

Journal: Science advances

In common: author Jurgen Germann

[4] doi:10.1159/000553009

State-of-the-Art Imaging and Localization Assessment in Post-Operative Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: A Review.

Journal: Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery

In common: 2 references

[5] doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2026.122002

EEG-based clustering shows distinct separation of chronic pain patients before spinal cord stimulation surgery.

Journal: NeuroImage

In common: pain, clinical / translational, 1 reference

[6] doi:10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102793 [code]

A predictive corticospinal model for pain perception.

Journal: Cell reports. Medicine

In common: pain, fMRI, 1 reference

[7] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1362 [code]

Human fMRI at 11.7T: Assessing feasibility, stability, and reliability on the Iseult scanner.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: fMRI, 1 reference

[8] doi:10.1038/s43856-026-01695-3 [code]

Predict neuromuscular performance in human epidural electrical stimulation: phase 1 trial interim results.

Journal: Communications medicine

In common: clinical / translational, 1 reference

[9] doi:10.1038/s41598-026-48278-9

Biphasic modulation of large-fiber excitability accompanied by dynamic nerve-intrinsic immune activation following CFA-induced peripheral inflammation in mice.

Journal: Scientific reports

In common: pain, 1 reference

[10] doi:10.1038/s41586-026-10296-y [code]

Deconstruction of a spino-brain-spinal cord circuit that drives chronic pain.

Journal: Nature

In common: pain, 1 reference

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.