Literature DB >> 29045806

Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with legacy pacemakers and defibrillators and abandoned leads.

Deepak Padmanabhan1, Danesh K Kella1, Ramila Mehta2, Suraj Kapa1, Abhishek Deshmukh1, Siva Mulpuru1, Allan S Jaffe1, Joel P Felmlee3, Mary L Jondal3, Connie M Dalzell1, Samuel J Asirvatham1, Yong-Mei Cha1, Robert E Watson3, Paul A Friedman4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), abandoned leads may act as antennae that result in tissue heating and arrhythmia induction.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the safety of MRI in patients with abandoned leads, with the addition of cardiac troponin T (cTnT) assessment to screen for myocardial damage.
METHODS: We reviewed our prospectively collected database of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) undergoing MRI between 2008 and 2017 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, and selected patients who had abandoned leads. We compared the adverse events in this population with an age, sex, and site of MRI-matched cohort of patients selected from this database. We evaluated paired (before/after) cTnT values using MRI in these patients.
RESULTS: Of 952 patients, 80 (8.4%) underwent 97 MRI scans with CIEDs in situ with 90 abandoned leads in place during the scans. The median age was 66 years (interquartile range 22.3 years) 66.1 years (interquartile range, Q1,Q3: 53.6, 75.9) with 66.3% (53 patients) men. There was no clinical or electrical evidence of CIED dysfunction, arrhythmias, or pain. Paired samples for the measurement of cTnT values were available in 40 patients undergoing 44 MRI examinations. The mean difference between the pre- and postimaging values was -0.002 ± 0.006 ng/mL (interquartile range 0). There was no difference after adjustment for total number of leads per patient and total number of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator coils.
CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of myocardial injury as measured by paired cTnT. The risk of MRI with abandoned leads appears low, suggesting a favorable risk-benefit profile in patients with CIEDs and abandoned leads who are considered for MRI.
Copyright © 2017 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abandoned leads; Cardiac implantable electronic devices; Legacy devices; MRI conditional devices; Magnetic resonance imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29045806     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.10.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Rhythm        ISSN: 1547-5271            Impact factor:   6.343


  17 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  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

Review 3.  [Safe MRI examinations in patients with pacemakers and ICD].

Authors:  D Beitzke
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Safety and Clinical Impact of MRI in Patients with Non-MRI-conditional Cardiac Devices.

Authors:  Sanjaya K Gupta; Lina Ya'qoub; Alan P Wimmer; Stanley Fisher; Ibrahim M Saeed
Journal:  Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging       Date:  2020-10-22

Review 5.  [ESC guidelines 2021 on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy : What's new?]

Authors:  Julia Vogler; Ahmad Keelani; Anna Traub; Roland Richard Tilz
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 1.443

6.  MRI of Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.

Authors:  Jessica A Martinez; Daniel B Ennis
Journal:  Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep       Date:  2019-05-27

7.  Reducing cardiac implantable electronic device-induced artefacts in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Aino-Maija Vuorinen; Lauri Lehmonen; Jarkko Karvonen; Miia Holmström; Sari Kivistö; Touko Kaasalainen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-08-27       Impact factor: 7.034

8.  Feasibility of MRI in patients with non-Pacemaker/Defibrillator metallic devices and abandoned leads.

Authors:  Prabhakaran P Gopalakrishnan; Loretta Gevenosky; Robert W W Biederman
Journal:  J Biomed Sci Eng       Date:  2021-03-09

Review 9.  [Benefits of cardiac magnetic resonance diagnostics in patients with heart rhythm disorders : From risk stratification to interventional procedures].

Authors:  S Oebel; C Jahnke; G Hindricks; I Paetsch
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 10.  Magnetic resonance imaging guidance for the optimization of ventricular tachycardia ablation.

Authors:  Rahul K Mukherjee; John Whitaker; Steven E Williams; Reza Razavi; Mark D O'Neill
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 5.214

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.