PURPOSE: Cardiac pacemaker malfunction due to exposure to magnetic fields may cause serious problems in some work environments for workers having cardiac pacemakers. The aim of this study was to find the magnetic field interference thresholds for several commonly used pacemaker models. METHODS: We investigated 16 pacemakers from three different manufacturers with the frequency range of 2 to 1,000 Hz, using sinusoidal, pulse, ramp, and square waveforms. The magnetic fields were produced by a computer-controlled Helmholtz coil system. RESULTS: Pacemaker malfunction occurred in six of 16 pacemakers. Interaction developed almost immediately after high-intensity magnetic field exposure started. With each waveform, at least two pacemakers exhibited interference. In most exposure settings, there was no interference at magnetic field levels below the international occupational safety limits. Nevertheless, some frequencies using ramp or square waveforms interfered with pacemakers even at levels below public exposure limits. The occurrence of interference depended greatly on the waveform, frequency, magnetic field intensity, and the sensing configuration of the pacemaker. Unipolar configurations were more susceptible for interference than the bipolar ones. In addition, magnetic fields perpendicular to the pacemaker loops were more likely to cause interference than parallel fields. CONCLUSION: There is a need for further investigations on pacemaker interference caused by different external magnetic fields to ensure safe working environment to workers with a pacemaker.
PURPOSE: Cardiac pacemaker malfunction due to exposure to magnetic fields may cause serious problems in some work environments for workers having cardiac pacemakers. The aim of this study was to find the magnetic field interference thresholds for several commonly used pacemaker models. METHODS: We investigated 16 pacemakers from three different manufacturers with the frequency range of 2 to 1,000 Hz, using sinusoidal, pulse, ramp, and square waveforms. The magnetic fields were produced by a computer-controlled Helmholtz coil system. RESULTS: Pacemaker malfunction occurred in six of 16 pacemakers. Interaction developed almost immediately after high-intensity magnetic field exposure started. With each waveform, at least two pacemakers exhibited interference. In most exposure settings, there was no interference at magnetic field levels below the international occupational safety limits. Nevertheless, some frequencies using ramp or square waveforms interfered with pacemakers even at levels below public exposure limits. The occurrence of interference depended greatly on the waveform, frequency, magnetic field intensity, and the sensing configuration of the pacemaker. Unipolar configurations were more susceptible for interference than the bipolar ones. In addition, magnetic fields perpendicular to the pacemaker loops were more likely to cause interference than parallel fields. CONCLUSION: There is a need for further investigations on pacemaker interference caused by different external magnetic fields to ensure safe working environment to workers with a pacemaker.
Authors: Alan D Bernstein; Jean-Claude Daubert; Ross D Fletcher; David L Hayes; Berndt Lüderitz; Dwight W Reynolds; Mark H Schoenfeld; Richard Sutton Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: R Frank; M Souques; C Himbert; F Hidden-Lucet; J C Petitot; G Fontaine; J Lambrozo; I Magne; J M Bailly Journal: Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss Date: 2003-04
Authors: A D Bernstein; A J Camm; R D Fletcher; R D Gold; A F Rickards; N P Smyth; S R Spielman; R Sutton Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 1987-07 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: D L Hayes; P J Wang; D W Reynolds; M Estes; J L Griffith; R A Steffens; G L Carlo; G K Findlay; C M Johnson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1997-05-22 Impact factor: 91.245