Literature DB >> 32125255

The Relationship between MRI Radiofrequency Energy and Function of Nonconditional Implanted Cardiac Devices: A Prospective Evaluation.

Amir Ali Rahsepar1, Stefan L Zimmerman1, Rozann Hansford1, Michael A Guttman1, Valeria Castro1, Diana McVeigh1, John E Kirsch1, Henry R Halperin1, Saman Nazarian1.   

Abstract

Background The risks associated with MRI in individuals who have implanted cardiac devices are thought to arise from the interaction between the implanted device and static, gradient, and radiofrequency magnetic fields. Purpose To determine the relationship between the peak whole-body averaged specific absorption rate (SAR) and change in magnetic field per unit time (dB/dt), maximum specific energy dose, imaging region, and implanted cardiac device characteristics and their function in patients undergoing MRI. Materials and Methods This prospective observational cohort study was conducted from October 16, 2003, to January 22, 2015 (https://ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01130896). Any individual with an implanted cardiac device who was referred for MRI was included. Clinical MRI protocols without SAR restriction were used. Exclusion criteria were newly implanted leads, abandoned or epicardial leads, and dependence on a pacemaker with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator without asynchronous pacing capability. For each MRI pulse sequence, the calculated whole-body values for SAR, dB/dt, and scan duration were collected. Atrial and ventricular sensing, lead impedance, and capture threshold were evaluated before and immediately after (within 10 minutes) completion of each MRI examination. Generalized estimating equations with Gaussian family, identity link, and an exchangeable working correlation matrix were used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 2028 MRI examinations were performed in 1464 study participants with 2755 device leads (mean age, 67 years ± 15 [standard deviation]; 930 men [64%]). There was no evidence of an association between radiofrequency energy deposition, dB/dt, or scan duration and changes in device parameters. Thoracic MRI was associated with decreased battery voltage immediately after MRI (β = -0.008 V, P < .001). Additionally, right ventricular (RV) lead length was associated with decreased RV sensing (β = -0.012 mV, P = .05) and reduced RV capture threshold (β = -0.002 V, P < .01) immediately after MRI. Conclusion There was no evidence of an association between MRI parameters that characterize patient exposure to radiofrequency energy and changes in device and lead parameters immediately after MRI. Nevertheless, device interrogation before and after MRI remains mandatory due to the potential for device reset and changes in lead or generator parameters. © RSNA, 2020 See also the editorial by Shellock in this issue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32125255      PMCID: PMC7193917          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020191132

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   29.146


  22 in total

1.  Force and torque effects of a 1.5-Tesla MRI scanner on cardiac pacemakers and ICDs.

Authors:  R Luechinger; F Duru; M B Scheidegger; P Boesiger; R Candinas
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 1.976

2.  MR imaging-related heating of deep brain stimulation electrodes: in vitro study.

Authors:  Daniel A Finelli; Ali R Rezai; Paul M Ruggieri; Jean A Tkach; John A Nyenhuis; Greg Hrdlicka; Ashwini Sharan; Jorge Gonzalez-Martinez; Paul H Stypulkowski; Frank G Shellock
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Modern pacemaker and implantable cardioverter/defibrillator systems can be magnetic resonance imaging safe: in vitro and in vivo assessment of safety and function at 1.5 T.

Authors:  Ariel Roguin; Menekhem M Zviman; Glenn R Meininger; E Rene Rodrigues; Timm M Dickfeld; David A Bluemke; Albert Lardo; Ronald D Berger; Hugh Calkins; Henry R Halperin
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2004-07-26       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 4.  How to perform magnetic resonance imaging on patients with implantable cardiac arrhythmia devices.

Authors:  Saman Nazarian; Henry R Halperin
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 6.343

5.  Evaluation of the RF heating of a generic deep brain stimulator exposed in 1.5 T magnetic resonance scanners.

Authors:  Eugenia Cabot; Tom Lloyd; Andreas Christ; Wolfgang Kainz; Mark Douglas; Gregg Stenzel; Steve Wedan; Niels Kuster
Journal:  Bioelectromagnetics       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 2.010

6.  A prospective evaluation of a protocol for magnetic resonance imaging of patients with implanted cardiac devices.

Authors:  Saman Nazarian; Rozann Hansford; Ariel Roguin; Dorith Goldsher; Menekhem M Zviman; Albert C Lardo; Brian S Caffo; Kevin D Frick; Michael A Kraut; Ihab R Kamel; Hugh Calkins; Ronald D Berger; David A Bluemke; Henry R Halperin
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-10-04       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Strategy for safe performance of extrathoracic magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 tesla in the presence of cardiac pacemakers in non-pacemaker-dependent patients: a prospective study with 115 examinations.

Authors:  Torsten Sommer; Claas P Naehle; Alexander Yang; Volkert Zeijlemaker; Matthias Hackenbroch; Alexandra Schmiedel; Carsten Meyer; Katharina Strach; Dirk Skowasch; Christian Vahlhaus; Harold Litt; Hans Schild
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-09-11       Impact factor: 29.690

8.  Assessing the Risks Associated with MRI in Patients with a Pacemaker or Defibrillator.

Authors:  Robert J Russo; Heather S Costa; Patricia D Silva; Jeffrey L Anderson; Aysha Arshad; Robert W W Biederman; Noel G Boyle; Jennifer V Frabizzio; Ulrika Birgersdotter-Green; Steven L Higgins; Rachel Lampert; Christian E Machado; Edward T Martin; Andrew L Rivard; Jason C Rubenstein; Raymond H M Schaerf; Jennifer D Schwartz; Dipan J Shah; Gery F Tomassoni; Gail T Tominaga; Allison E Tonkin; Seth Uretsky; Steven D Wolff
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  A novel brain stimulation technology provides compatibility with MRI.

Authors:  Peter Serano; Leonardo M Angelone; Husam Katnani; Emad Eskandar; Giorgio Bonmassar
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Complexity of MRI induced heating on metallic leads: experimental measurements of 374 configurations.

Authors:  Eugenio Mattei; Michele Triventi; Giovanni Calcagnini; Federica Censi; Wolfgang Kainz; Gonzalo Mendoza; Howard I Bassen; Pietro Bartolini
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2008-03-03       Impact factor: 2.819

View more
  2 in total

1.  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

2.  2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients.

Authors:  Maully J Shah; Michael J Silka; Jennifer N Avari Silva; Seshadri Balaji; Cheyenne M Beach; Monica N Benjamin; Charles I Berul; Bryan Cannon; Frank Cecchin; Mitchell I Cohen; Aarti S Dalal; Brynn E Dechert; Anne Foster; Roman Gebauer; M Cecilia Gonzalez Corcia; Prince J Kannankeril; Peter P Karpawich; Jeffery J Kim; Mani Ram Krishna; Peter Kubuš; Martin J LaPage; Douglas Y Mah; Lindsey Malloy-Walton; Aya Miyazaki; Kara S Motonaga; Mary C Niu; Melissa Olen; Thomas Paul; Eric Rosenthal; Elizabeth V Saarel; Massimo Stefano Silvetti; Elizabeth A Stephenson; Reina B Tan; John Triedman; Nicholas H Von Bergen; Philip L Wackel
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2021-07-29
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.