Skip to main content
Log in

Ex vivo porcine model for eye, eyelid, and orbit movement analysis of 4-mm ferromagnetic foreign bodies in MRI

  • Oculoplastics and Orbit
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Ferromagnetic foreign bodies (FFB) present during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) explorations can lead to tissue injury due to movement, especially in and around the eyes. Ferromagnetic foreign bodies located in the intraocular area, eyelids, and orbit are thus prohibited from undergoing MRI. The aim of the study was to analyze movement of 4-mm ferromagnetic foreign bodies in MRI in the eye, eyelid, and orbit using computed tomography (CT) scan.

Method

We developed a porcine model using 12 quarters of fresh porcine heads. Each porcine head included one whole orbit with the ocular globe, orbital fat, muscles, and eyelids. Four-millimeter FFB were implanted in the eye within 2 days post-slaughter, and images were acquired within 5 days post-slaughter. Four-millimeter FFB movement was analyzed after 1.5-Tesla (T) MRI. Four locations were tested: intravitreous, suprachoroidal, intraorbital fat, and intrapalpebral. Movement analysis was assessed using computed tomography (CT) scan.

Results

The intravitreous ferromagnetic ball moved 14.0 ± 8.8 mm (p < 0.01), the suprachoroidal ball moved 16.8 ± 5.4 mm (p < 0.01), the intraorbital fat ball moved 5.8 ± 0.9 mm (p > 0.05), and the intrapalpebral ball moved 2.0 ± 0.4 mm (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

The ex vivo porcine model was able to study FFB movement. The 4-mm ferromagnetic balls moved in intravitreous and in suprachoroidal locations after MRI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Detournay. B, Courouve. L (2017). Les insuffisances en matière d’équipement d’imagerie médicale en France. http://www.sfrnet.org/rc/org/sfrnet/htm/Article/2015/20150625-083932-499/src/htm_fullText/fr/2015-014%20ISA%20IRM%20Rapport%2013-05-15.pdf

  2. Schenck JF (2000) Safety of strong, static magnetic fields. J Magn Reson Imaging 12:2–19

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lagouros PA et al (1987) Magnetic resonance imaging and intraocular foreign bodies. Arch Ophthalmol 105:551–553

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Williams S, Char DH, Dillon WP, Lincoff N, Moseley M (1988) Ferrous intraocular foreign bodies and magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Ophthalmol 105:398–401

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Williamson TH, Smith FW, Forrester JV (1989) Magnetic resonance imaging of intraocular foreign bodies. Br J Ophthalmol 73:555–558

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gunenc U, Ahmet M, Suleyman K, Tugrul P (1992) Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in the detection and localization of intra ocular foreign bodies. Documentia Ophtalmologica 81:369–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00169098

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cullen C, Kendall E, Cui J, Colleaux K, Grahn B (2002) The effects of exposure to a 1.5-tesla magnetic field on intravitreous metallic foreign bodies in rabbits. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 240:393–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Duratool (2014) 450 piece steel Ball Assortment V1.0 2057 https://cpc.farnell.com/duratool/d01897/steel-ball-assortment-450pc/dp/FN02654#anchorTechnicalDOCS

  9. Yushkevich PA et al (2006) User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. NeuroImage 31:1116–1128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lawrence DA, Lipman AT, Gupta SK, Nacey NC (2015) Undetected intraocular metallic foreign body causing hyphema in a patient undergoing MRI: a rare occurrence demonstrating the limitations of pre-MRI safety screening. Magn Reson Imaging 33:358–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Platt AS, Wajda BG, Ingram AD, Wei X-C, Ells AL (2017) Metallic intraocular foreign body as detected by magnetic resonance imaging without complications– a case report. Am J Ophthalmol Case Reports 7:76–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fernandez-Bueno I, Pastor JC, Gayoso M, Alcalde I (2008) Müller and macrophage-like cell interactions in an organotypic culture of porcine neuroretina. Mol Vis 14:2148–2156

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ruiz-Ederra J et al (2005) The pig eye as a novel model of glaucoma. Exp Eye Res 81:561–569

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nishi O, Nishi K, Nishi Y, Chang S (2008) Capsular bag refilling using a new accommodating intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:302–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Olsen TW, Sanderson S, Feng X, Hubbard WC (2002) Porcine sclera: thickness and surface area. IOVS Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 43:4

    Google Scholar 

  16. Swindle KE, Hamilton PD, Ravi N (2008) In situ formation of hydrogels as vitreous substitutes: viscoelastic comparison to porcine vitreous. J Biomed Mater Res 87A:656–665

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Gor DM, Kirsch CF, Leen J, Turbin R, Von Hagen S (2001) Radiologic differentiation of intraocular glass: evaluation of imaging techniques, glass types, size, and effect of intraocular hemorrhage. Am J Roentgenol 177:1199–1203

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Shellock FG (2000) Radiofrequency energy-induced heating during MR procedures: a review. J Magn Reson Imaging 12:30–36

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

Bellamy Michel, Les Fins Gourmets Rheusois.

Availability of data and material

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Ghemame.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghemame, M., Cathelineau, C., Carsin-Nicol, B. et al. Ex vivo porcine model for eye, eyelid, and orbit movement analysis of 4-mm ferromagnetic foreign bodies in MRI. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 260, 311–318 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-021-05258-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-021-05258-1

Keywords

Navigation