OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and diagnostic utility of 1.5-T MRI examinations of individuals with conventional and MRI-conditional cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients with a CIED who were referred for MRI were evaluated by radiologists and cardiac electrophysiologists for study participation. CIED interrogation was performed immediately before and after MRI, and cardiac telemetry monitoring was performed during MRI. CIED programming changes, malfunctions, and intraprocedural events were documented. Whether diagnostic questions were answered and whether artifacts related to the CIED were present and negatively affected image interpretation were recorded. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen MRI examinations were performed for 104 patients with CIEDs (74 pacemakers [60 conventional, 14 MRI conditional]; 39 implantable cardiac defibrillators). Device reprogramming was required before MRI for 62.8% of studies (71/113). No significant changes in lead parameters were noted during or after MRI. Electromagnetic noise was detected on at least one lead in 7.1% of studies. Three patients reported transient symptoms (one case each of heating at the pocket site, tingling at the pocket site, and palpitations). All images were considered diagnostic for the original clinical query. Artifacts related to CIEDs were described in 3.5% of MRI reports (4/113) and were present only when the pulse generator was included in the FOV. CIED-related artifacts limited evaluation of tissues immediately adjacent to the pulse generator. CONCLUSION: Establishment of a multidisciplinary work flow allows individuals with conventional and MRI-conditional CIEDs to safely undergo 1.5-T MRI with diagnostic questions consistently answered.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and diagnostic utility of 1.5-T MRI examinations of individuals with conventional and MRI-conditional cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients with a CIED who were referred for MRI were evaluated by radiologists and cardiac electrophysiologists for study participation. CIED interrogation was performed immediately before and after MRI, and cardiac telemetry monitoring was performed during MRI. CIED programming changes, malfunctions, and intraprocedural events were documented. Whether diagnostic questions were answered and whether artifacts related to the CIED were present and negatively affected image interpretation were recorded. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen MRI examinations were performed for 104 patients with CIEDs (74 pacemakers [60 conventional, 14 MRI conditional]; 39 implantable cardiac defibrillators). Device reprogramming was required before MRI for 62.8% of studies (71/113). No significant changes in lead parameters were noted during or after MRI. Electromagnetic noise was detected on at least one lead in 7.1% of studies. Three patients reported transient symptoms (one case each of heating at the pocket site, tingling at the pocket site, and palpitations). All images were considered diagnostic for the original clinical query. Artifacts related to CIEDs were described in 3.5% of MRI reports (4/113) and were present only when the pulse generator was included in the FOV. CIED-related artifacts limited evaluation of tissues immediately adjacent to the pulse generator. CONCLUSION: Establishment of a multidisciplinary work flow allows individuals with conventional and MRI-conditional CIEDs to safely undergo 1.5-T MRI with diagnostic questions consistently answered.
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
Authors: Tushar Chandra; Govind B Chavhan; Raymond W Sze; David Swenson; Stephanie Holowka; Stanley Fricke; Scott Davidson; Ramesh S Iyer Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2019-03-29
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: Ananna Zaman; Samantha Zhao; Jordana Kron; Antonio Abbate; Anna Tomdio; W Gregory Hundley; Jennifer H Jordan Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2022-08-19 Impact factor: 3.955
Authors: Daniel Kiblboeck; Christian Reiter; Juergen Kammler; Pierre Schmit; Hermann Blessberger; Joerg Kellermair; Franz Fellner; Clemens Steinwender Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2018-07-05 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Steven Mullane; Kyle Michaelis; Charles Henrikson; Sei Iwai; Crystal Miller; Camden Harrell; David Hayes Journal: Heart Rhythm O2 Date: 2021-03-09
Authors: Wolfgang Rudolf Bauer; Dennis H Lau; Christian Wollmann; Andrew McGavigan; Jacques Mansourati; Theresa Reiter; Simone Frömer; Mark E Ladd; Harald H Quick Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-12-03 Impact factor: 4.379