Touko Kaasalainen1, Sami Pakarinen2, Sari Kivistö3, Miia Holmström4, Helena Hänninen5, Juha Peltonen6, Kirsi Lauerma7, Outi Sipilä8. 1. HUS Medical Imaging Center, Helsinki University Central Hospital, POB 340 (Haartmaninkatu 4), 00290 Helsinki, Finland; Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: touko.kaasalainen@hus.fi. 2. HUS Department of Cardiology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, POB 340 (Haartmaninkatu 4), 00290 Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: sami.pakarinen@hus.fi. 3. HUS Medical Imaging Center, Helsinki University Central Hospital, POB 340 (Haartmaninkatu 4), 00290 Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: sari.kivisto@hus.fi. 4. HUS Medical Imaging Center, Helsinki University Central Hospital, POB 340 (Haartmaninkatu 4), 00290 Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: miia.holmstrom@hus.fi. 5. HUS Department of Cardiology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, POB 340 (Haartmaninkatu 4), 00290 Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: helena.hanninen@hus.fi. 6. HUS Medical Imaging Center, Helsinki University Central Hospital, POB 340 (Haartmaninkatu 4), 00290 Helsinki, Finland; Department of Biomedical Engineering and Computational Science, School of Science, Aalto University, Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: juha.peltonen@hus.fi. 7. HUS Medical Imaging Center, Helsinki University Central Hospital, POB 340 (Haartmaninkatu 4), 00290 Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: kirsi.lauerma@hus.fi. 8. HUS Medical Imaging Center, Helsinki University Central Hospital, POB 340 (Haartmaninkatu 4), 00290 Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: outi.sipila@hus.fi.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to introduce a single centre "real life" experience of performing MRI examinations in clinical practice on patients with cardiac pacemaker systems. Additionally, we aimed to evaluate the safety of using a dedicated safety protocol for these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a 1.5T MRI scanner to conduct 68 MRI scans of different body regions in patients with pacing systems. Of the cardiac devices, 32% were MR-conditional, whereas the remaining 68% were MR-unsafe. We recorded the functional parameters of the devices prior, immediately after, and approximately one month after the MRI scanning, and compared the device parameters to the baseline values. RESULTS: All MRI examinations were completed safely, and each device could be interrogated normally following the MRI. We observed no changes in the programmed parameters of the devices. For most of the participants, the distributions of the immediate and one-month changes in the device parameters were within 20% of the baseline values, although some changes approached clinically important thresholds. Furthermore, we observed no differences in the variable changes between MR-conditional and MR-unsafe pacing systems, or between scans of the thorax area and other scanned areas. CONCLUSION: MRI in patients with MR-conditional pacing systems and selected MR-unsafe systems could be performed safely under strict conditions in this study.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to introduce a single centre "real life" experience of performing MRI examinations in clinical practice on patients with cardiac pacemaker systems. Additionally, we aimed to evaluate the safety of using a dedicated safety protocol for these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a 1.5T MRI scanner to conduct 68 MRI scans of different body regions in patients with pacing systems. Of the cardiac devices, 32% were MR-conditional, whereas the remaining 68% were MR-unsafe. We recorded the functional parameters of the devices prior, immediately after, and approximately one month after the MRI scanning, and compared the device parameters to the baseline values. RESULTS: All MRI examinations were completed safely, and each device could be interrogated normally following the MRI. We observed no changes in the programmed parameters of the devices. For most of the participants, the distributions of the immediate and one-month changes in the device parameters were within 20% of the baseline values, although some changes approached clinically important thresholds. Furthermore, we observed no differences in the variable changes between MR-conditional and MR-unsafe pacing systems, or between scans of the thorax area and other scanned areas. CONCLUSION: MRI in patients with MR-conditional pacing systems and selected MR-unsafe systems could be performed safely under strict conditions in this study.
Authors: Saman Nazarian; Rozann Hansford; Amir A Rahsepar; Valeria Weltin; Diana McVeigh; Esra Gucuk Ipek; Alan Kwan; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins; Albert C Lardo; Michael A Kraut; Ihab R Kamel; Stefan L Zimmerman; Henry R Halperin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Carol Chen-Scarabelli; Chad McRee; Massoud A Leesar; Fadi G Hage; Tiziano M Scarabelli Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2016-05-25 Impact factor: 5.952