BACKGROUND: Electromagnetic fields, such as those generated by cellular phones and metal detectors, may interfere with normal pacemaker function. However, it remains unclear whether the wireless capsule endoscope interacts with implanted pacemakers. This prospective study evaluated potential interactions between the M2A video capsule (Given Imaging, Yoknam, Israel) and implanted pacemakers. METHODS: A total of 100 consecutive patients (70 men, 30 women) with an implanted pacemaker (95 on bipolar mode) were studied. The testing was performed with a functional testing device (Test Cap) for the Given Diagnostic System that reproduces the effect of the video capsule by transmitting at exactly the same frequency. During continuous electrocardiographic monitoring and recording, 100 tests were carried out without changing the pacemaker settings. Those with a positive result were retested 1 week later. RESULTS: The 100 pacemakers evaluated in the study population included the following: 70 dual chamber (11 DDD, 56 DDDR, 3 VDD) and 30 ventricular inhibited (12 VVI, 18 VVIR). In 4 of the 100 patients, pacemaker interference (noise-mode function forcing a synchronous mode) was registered during the Test Cap operation. Three patients had a dual-chamber pacemaker, and one had a single-chamber pacemaker. The interference was reproducible in all cases 1 week later. None of the implanted pacemakers tested was affected by oversensing. CONCLUSIONS: Electromagnetic interferences with pacemakers from the M2A video capsule can occur, but this is without clinical significance. No potentially dangerous pacemaker inhibition was observed.
BACKGROUND: Electromagnetic fields, such as those generated by cellular phones and metal detectors, may interfere with normal pacemaker function. However, it remains unclear whether the wireless capsule endoscope interacts with implanted pacemakers. This prospective study evaluated potential interactions between the M2A video capsule (Given Imaging, Yoknam, Israel) and implanted pacemakers. METHODS: A total of 100 consecutive patients (70 men, 30 women) with an implanted pacemaker (95 on bipolar mode) were studied. The testing was performed with a functional testing device (Test Cap) for the Given Diagnostic System that reproduces the effect of the video capsule by transmitting at exactly the same frequency. During continuous electrocardiographic monitoring and recording, 100 tests were carried out without changing the pacemaker settings. Those with a positive result were retested 1 week later. RESULTS: The 100 pacemakers evaluated in the study population included the following: 70 dual chamber (11 DDD, 56 DDDR, 3 VDD) and 30 ventricular inhibited (12 VVI, 18 VVIR). In 4 of the 100 patients, pacemaker interference (noise-mode function forcing a synchronous mode) was registered during the Test Cap operation. Three patients had a dual-chamber pacemaker, and one had a single-chamber pacemaker. The interference was reproducible in all cases 1 week later. None of the implanted pacemakers tested was affected by oversensing. CONCLUSIONS: Electromagnetic interferences with pacemakers from the M2A video capsule can occur, but this is without clinical significance. No potentially dangerous pacemaker inhibition was observed.