Reply:

We would like to thank Dr Kanal for his interest in our article and his recent comments in response to our publication, “Pacemakers in MRI for the Neuroradiologist.” We agree with Dr Kanal that our responsibility as radiologists is to perform risk-benefit–based assessments on a patient-by-patient basis before approving or rejecting an MR imaging examination in a patient with a non-MR imaging–conditional device. However, we would like to reiterate that the goal of our article was to provide both a safe/conservative and practical framework that a nonexpert radiologist could use in his or her own clinical practice. While certainly not exhaustive, we hope that our publication can help give patients who would have previously been deemed unsuitable for MR imaging examinations greater access to these tests in the future.