Objective. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia (MNH) emerges as a promising therapeutic strategy for cancer treatment, leveraging alternating magnetic fields (AMFs) to induce localized heating through magnetic nanoparticles. However, the interaction of AMFs with biological tissues leads to non-specific heating caused by eddy currents, triggering thermoregulatory responses and complex thermal gradients throughout the body of the patient. While previous studies have implemented the Atkinson–Brezovich limit to mitigate potential harm, recent research underscores discrepancies between this threshold and clinical outcomes, necessitating a re-evaluation of this safety limit. Therefore, in this study, through electromagnetic (EM) simulations, the complex interaction between AMFs and anatomical models was investigated. Approach. In particular, we considered a circular coil configuration placed at different positions along the craniocaudal axis of various anatomical human models. The excitation current was normalized, at different frequencies, to meet the basic restriction of local 10 g-averaged specific energy absorption rate (SAR) in the human models, as defined by the exposure guidelines of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the standard IEC 60601-2-33 of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). Main results. The resulting permissible magnetic field strength values, for the reference levels set by the ICNIRP 2020 guidelines, emerged to be up to approximately 1.4 and 3 times less than that defined in the Atkinson–Brezovich limit. The widely used limit was found to align more closely with the first level of controlled operating mode defined in the IEC 60601-2-33 standard. Significance. The results indicate that the permissible magnetic field amplitude during MNH treatment should be much lower than that in the Atkinson–Brezovich limit. This study offers valuable insights into the role of computational simulations in advancing the potential to establish a reliable metric for safety evaluation and monitoring within the clinical framework of MNH.

The present study focuses on the development of a methodology for evaluating the safety of MNH systems, through the numerical prediction of the induced temperature rise in superficial skin layers due to eddy currents heating under an alternating magnetic field (AMF). The methodology is supported and validated through experimental measurements of the AMF’s distribution, as well as temperature data from the torsos of six patients who participated in a clinical trial study. The simulations involved a computational model of the actual coil, a computational model of the cooling system used for the cooling of the patients during treatment, and a detailed human anatomical model from the Virtual Population family. The numerical predictions exhibit strong agreement with the experimental measurements, and the deviations are below the estimated combined uncertainties, confirming the accuracy of computational modeling. This study highlights the crucial role of simulations for translational medicine and paves the way for personalized treatment planning.

The medical imaging of a patient with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) inside a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner carries the risk of tissue heating at the tip of the implant lead. In this work, we numerically assessed the impact of various factors, namely the resonant frequency, the imaging position, the implant position inside the human body and the coil configuration, on the induced tangential electric field along 10,080 cardiac lead paths at 1140 different scanning scenarios. During this comparative process, a function was considered based on the induced electrical potential at the tip of the lead. The input power of each coil was adjusted to generate constant B₁⁺_RMS at the iso-center or to limit the global SAR to the values provided in the safety guidelines IEC 60601-33. The values of the function were higher for higher static field and longer coil lengths when assessing the cases of a constrained B₁⁺_RMS, and the trend was reversed considering the limiting SAR values. Moreover, the electric field was higher as the imaging landmark approached the thorax and the neck. It was also shown that both the choice regarding the insertion vein of the lead and the positioning of the implantable pulse generator (IPG) affected the induced tangential electric field along the paths. In particular, when the CIED lead was inserted into the left axillary vein instead of entering into the right subclavian vein, the electrical potential at the tip could be on average lower by 1.6 dB and 2.1 dB at 1.5 T and 3 T, respectively.

A specific method for the estimation of the induced power at the tip by an active implantable medical device (AIMD) during an MRI scan is not defined in ISO/TS 10974:2018 for the cases of devices with multiple leads or the presence of abandoned and retained leads, where coupling between two leads could take place. Therefore, the aim of this work is to evaluate a numerical method, similar to Tier 3 of ISO/TS 10974:2018, for the estimation of the deposited power at the tips of two coupled implanted leads. Specifically, the proposed methodology applies the same parameters as the standard Tier 3 process. However, these parameters are calculated for each implant in the presence of its neighbors in order to include the coupling between them. Numerical electromagnetic simulations were performed, in which a pair of generic implant leads was excited and placed at various positions relative to each other. The deposited power at the tips of the pair was analyzed based on the standard Tier 3 approach, and the results show that this could overestimate the induced power by more than 6 dB. Therefore, a modified Tier 3 numerical method for the estimation of the deposited power at their tips is proposed, which can produce a reliable calculation. This method was confirmed by evaluating various configurations of the two leads excited by orthogonal electrical fields, and also its uncertainty budget was developed. Finally, the method was repeated for different properties of the generic implants and the surrounding tissue, as well as for a pair of realistic implants and in vivo implantation trajectories.