Literature DB >> 15277324

Modern pacemaker and implantable cardioverter/defibrillator systems can be magnetic resonance imaging safe: in vitro and in vivo assessment of safety and function at 1.5 T.

Ariel Roguin1, Menekhem M Zviman, Glenn R Meininger, E Rene Rodrigues, Timm M Dickfeld, David A Bluemke, Albert Lardo, Ronald D Berger, Hugh Calkins, Henry R Halperin.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: MRI has unparalleled soft-tissue imaging capabilities. The presence of devices such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter/defibrillators (ICDs), however, is historically considered a contraindication to MRI. These devices are now smaller, with less magnetic material and improved electromagnetic interference protection. Our aim was to determine whether these modern systems can be used in an MR environment. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We tested in vitro and in vivo lead heating, device function, force acting on the device, and image distortion at 1.5 T. Clinical MR protocols and in vivo measurements yielded temperature changes <0.5 degrees C. Older (manufactured before 2000) ICDs were damaged by the MR scans. Newer ICD systems and most pacemakers, however, were not. The maximal force acting on newer devices was <100 g. Modern (manufactured after 2000) ICD systems were implanted in dogs (n=18), and after 4 weeks, 3- to 4-hour MR scans were performed (n=15). No device dysfunction occurred. The images were of high quality with distortion dependent on the scan sequence and plane. Pacing threshold and intracardiac electrogram amplitude were unchanged over the 8 weeks, except in 1 animal that, after MRI, had a transient (<12 hours) capture failure. Pathological data of the scanned animals revealed very limited necrosis or fibrosis at the tip of the lead area, which was not different from controls (n=3) not subjected to MRI.
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that certain modern pacemaker and ICD systems may indeed be MRI safe. This may have major clinical implications for current imaging practices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15277324      PMCID: PMC3410537          DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000137121.28722.33

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  20 in total

1.  MR imaging and cardiac pacemakers: in-vitro evaluation and in-vivo studies in 51 patients at 0.5 T.

Authors:  T Sommer; C Vahlhaus; G Lauck; A von Smekal; M Reinke; U Hofer; W Block; F Träber; C Schneider; J Gieseke; W Jung; H Schild
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  MR imaging-related heating of deep brain stimulation electrodes: in vitro study.

Authors:  Daniel A Finelli; Ali R Rezai; Paul M Ruggieri; Jean A Tkach; John A Nyenhuis; Greg Hrdlicka; Ashwini Sharan; Jorge Gonzalez-Martinez; Paul H Stypulkowski; Frank G Shellock
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 3.  Interference in implanted cardiac devices, part II.

Authors:  Sergio L Pinski; Richard G Trohman
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 1.976

4.  Can patients with implantable pacemakers safely undergo magnetic resonance imaging?

Authors:  J Rod Gimbel; Emanuel Kanal
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2004-04-07       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 5.  Thermal responses in human subjects exposed to magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  F G Shellock
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  1992-03-31       Impact factor: 5.691

6.  Cardiovascular catheters and accessories: ex vivo testing of ferromagnetism, heating, and artifacts associated with MRI.

Authors:  F G Shellock; V J Shellock
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1998 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators are unaffected by operation of an extremity MR imaging system.

Authors:  F G Shellock; M O'Neil; V Ivans; D Kelly; M O'Connor; L Toay; J V Crues
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Effects of magnetic resonance imaging on cardiac pacemakers and electrodes.

Authors:  S Achenbach; W Moshage; B Diem; T Bieberle; V Schibgilla; K Bachmann
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.749

9.  The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction.

Authors:  R J Kim; E Wu; A Rafael; E L Chen; M A Parker; O Simonetti; F J Klocke; R O Bonow; R M Judd
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-16       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Magnetic resonance imaging and cardiac pacemaker safety at 1.5-Tesla.

Authors:  Edward T Martin; James A Coman; Frank G Shellock; Christopher C Pulling; Robert Fair; Kim Jenkins
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2004-04-07       Impact factor: 24.094

View more
  55 in total

1.  Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with permanent pacemakers: a collaborative clinical approach.

Authors:  Barry Anthony Boilson; Anita Wokhlu; Nancy G Acker; Joel P Felmlee; Robert E Watson; Paul R Julsrud; Paul A Friedman; Yong-Mei Cha; Robert F Rea; David L Hayes; Win-Kuang Shen
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 1.900

2.  Application of registration for ablation: a marriage of technologies.

Authors:  John M Miller
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.900

3.  [Magnetic resonance imaging and implantable cardiac devices. Current status and future perspectives of MR-compatible systems].

Authors:  M Dorenkamp; M Roser; B Hamm; W Haverkamp
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.443

4.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-05-17       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Guidelines and the growing service burden.

Authors:  J Rod Gimbel
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 1.900

6.  A protocol for patients with cardiovascular implantable devices undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): should defibrillation threshold testing be performed post-(MRI).

Authors:  Peter Thomas Burke; Hamid Ghanbari; Patrick B Alexander; Michael K Shaw; Marcos Daccarett; Christian Machado
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 1.900

7.  Magnetic resonance imaging, pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: current situation and clinical perspective.

Authors:  M J W Götte; I K Rüssel; G J de Roest; T Germans; R F Veldkamp; P Knaapen; C P Allaart; A C van Rossum
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 8.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  An eight-year prospective controlled study about the safety and diagnostic value of cardiac and non-cardiac 1.5-T MRI in patients with a conventional pacemaker or a conventional implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

Authors:  Pierpaolo Lupo; Riccardo Cappato; Giovanni Di Leo; Francesco Secchi; Giacomo D E Papini; Sara Foresti; Hussam Ali; Guido M G De Ambroggi; Antonio Sorgente; Gianluca Epicoco; Paola M Cannaò; Francesco Sardanelli
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance: structure, function, perfusion, and viability.

Authors:  David C Isbell; Christopher M Kramer
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.952

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.