{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02461033634126333, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006562756357670222, 'mean_word_length': 5.387434554973822, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
MR imaging in patients with metallic implants.

A total of 305 magnetic resonance (MR) examinations were performed in 236 patients with metallic implants. Most examinations were performed at 0.3 T. The metallic implants included central nervous system shunting devices, tantalum mesh, surgical wire, skin staples, surgical clips, metallic orthopedic devices, and a few miscellaneous metallic objects. Patients with cardiac pacemakers, electrical implants, prosthetic cardiac valves, and aneurysm clips were excluded from MR examinations. The images were reviewed for evidence of metallic artifact. The conspicuity of artifact was related to the composition, mass, orientation, and position of the metallic object in the body. In most instances, the metallic artifact did not interfere with the interpretation of the image. The patients' records were also reviewed for adverse effects noted by each patient during the MR examination. Only two patients reported discomfort that could possibly have been related to their metallic implants, but in both cases it seemed unlikely that the symptoms were actually related to the imaging process. There were no apparent short-term adverse effects demonstrated in these patients.