Literature DB >> 24809591

Safety and outcomes of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with abandoned pacemaker and defibrillator leads.

John V Higgins1, Joseph J Gard, Seth H Sheldon, Raul E Espinosa, Christopher P Wood, Joel P Felmlee, Yong-Mei Cha, Samuel J Asirvatham, Connie Dalzell, Nancy Acker, Robert E Watson, Paul A Friedman.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Abandoned cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) leads remain a contraindication to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, largely due to in vitro data showing endocardial heating secondary to the radiofrequency field. We tested the hypothesis that abandoned CIED leads do not pose an increased risk of clinical harm for patients undergoing MRI.
METHODS: This single-center retrospective study examined the outcomes of patients who had device generators removed before MRI, rendering the device leads abandoned. Information was gathered through chart review. Data collected included lead model, pacing threshold before MRI, anatomic region examined, threshold data after generator reimplantation, and clinical patient outcome.
RESULTS: Patients (n = 19, 11 men and eight women) ranged in age from 19 to 85 at the time of MRI. There was a mean of 1.63 abandoned leads at the time of imaging; none of the leads were MRI conditional. Of the three implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads, two of three were dual coil. Most (31/35) of the scans performed were of the central nervous system, including head and spinal imaging. There were no adverse events associated with MRI in any of these patients with abandoned leads within 7 days of the scan. No lead malfunctions or clinically significant change in pacing thresholds were noted with generator reimplantation.
CONCLUSION: The use of MRI in patients with abandoned cardiac device leads appears feasible when performed under careful monitoring, with no adverse events, although the experience is small. MRI did not affect the function of leads that were subsequently reconnected to a cardiac device. ©2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cardiac pacemaker; implantable cardioverter defibrillator; magnetic resonance imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24809591     DOI: 10.1111/pace.12419

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol        ISSN: 0147-8389            Impact factor:   1.976


  23 in total

1.  Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: a single-center prospective study.

Authors:  Mrinal Yadava; Matthew Nugent; Angela Krebsbach; Jessica Minnier; Peter Jessel; Charles A Henrikson
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2017-07-22       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 2.  Safety of implanted cardiac devices in an MRI environment.

Authors:  Esra Gucuk Ipek; Saman Nazarian
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 3.  Viewpoint: Cardiac implantable electronic devices and magnetic resonance compatibility: was it really necessary?

Authors:  Richard Sutton; David G Benditt
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2019-02-22       Impact factor: 1.900

4.  Cardiac troponin T in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices undergoing magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  John V Higgins; Robert E Watson; Allan S Jaffe; Connie Dalzell; Nancy Acker; Joel P Felmlee; Samuel J Asirvatham; Yong-Mei Cha; Paul A Friedman; Suraj Kapa
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.900

5.  Cardiac implanted electronic devices and MRI safety in 2018-the state of play.

Authors:  Ryan Mark Shulman; Ben Hunt
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-04-30       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Magnetic resonance imaging of patients with epicardial leads: in vitro evaluation of temperature changes at the lead tip.

Authors:  Christian Balmer; Matthias Gass; Hitendu Dave; Firat Duru; Roger Luechinger
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 1.900

7.  Consequences of Retained Defibrillator and Pacemaker Leads After Heart Transplantation-An Underrecognized Problem.

Authors:  Luise Holzhauser; Teruhiko Imamura; Hemal M Nayak; Nitasha Sarswat; Gene Kim; Jayant Raikhelkar; Sara Kalantari; Amit Patel; David Onsager; Tae Song; Takeyoshi Ota; Valluvan Jeevanandam; Gabriel Sayer; Nir Uriel
Journal:  J Card Fail       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 5.712

8.  Safety and utility of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices.

Authors:  Jordan B Strom; Jill B Whelan; Changyu Shen; Shuang Qi Zheng; Koenraad J Mortele; Daniel B Kramer
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2017-04-03       Impact factor: 6.343

9.  [Pacemaker and MRI in clinical practice].

Authors:  A Fendt; M Strauß; K Kouraki; R Zahn; T Kleemann
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 1.443

10.  Changes in the specific absorption rate (SAR) of radiofrequency energy in patients with retained cardiac leads during MRI at 1.5T and 3T.

Authors:  Laleh Golestanirad; Amir Ali Rahsepar; John E Kirsch; Kenichiro Suwa; Jeremy C Collins; Leonardo M Angelone; Boris Keil; Rod S Passman; Giorgio Bonmassar; Peter Serano; Peter Krenz; Jim DeLap; James C Carr; Lawrence L Wald
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2018-06-12       Impact factor: 4.668

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.