Literature DB >> 8774821

Safe performance of magnetic resonance imaging on five patients with permanent cardiac pacemakers.

J R Gimbel1, D Johnson, P A Levine, B L Wilkoff.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Five patients with permanent cardiac pacemakers (Pacesetter models 261, 285, 2016, 2020, 2022) underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Only one patient (underlying rhythm asystole) was pacemaker dependent. A variety of pacing configurations (single and dual chamber; unipolar and bipolar; sensor and nonsensor driven) were scanned. A thorough evaluation of each pacing system was performed before and after scanning including determination of pacing and sensing thresholds. During MRI the patient was monitored using either ECG, pulse oximetry, or direct voice contact. In four patients heavy dressings were applied over the pacemaker pocket site. Patients were asked to report any symptoms experienced during MRI.
RESULTS: The four nonpacemaker dependent patients remained in sinus rhythm throughout the MRI. During and after the MRI all pacemakers continued to function normally except for one transient pause of approximately 2 seconds (noted by pulse oximeter) toward the end of the scan. This occurred in a pacemaker dependent patient with a unipolar dual chamber device programmed DOO. No patient experienced any torque or heat sensation.
CONCLUSION: When appropriate strategies are used our experience suggests that MRI may be performed, when necessary, with an acceptable risk-benefit ratio to the patient. It is unclear whether the isolated pause that was observed was due to the effect of the MRI, an artifact with the monitoring system, or oversensing by the pacemaker. Appropriate patient selection, close monitoring during the scan, and follow-up after MRI are of paramount importance. Further study is necessary to refine the appropriate strategies that could be used to consistently perform MRI safely in a selected pacemaker population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8774821     DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1996.tb03387.x

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


  22 in total

1.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-05-17       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Adaptive removal of gradients-induced artefacts on ECG in MRI: a performance analysis of RLS filtering.

Authors:  Mario Sansone; Luciano Mirarchi; Marcello Bracale
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2010-03-18       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 3.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  Safety of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with cardiovascular implants and devices.

Authors:  S K Prasad; D J Pennell
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 5.994

5.  Compatibility of temporary pacemaker myocardial pacing leads with magnetic resonance imaging: an ex vivo tissue study.

Authors:  Alexander Pfeil; Stefanie Drobnik; Reinhard Rzanny; Anas Aboud; Joachim Böttcher; Peter Schmidt; Christian Ortmann; Gita Mall; Khosro Hekmat; Bernhard Brehm; Juergen Reichenbach; Thomas E Mayer; Gunter Wolf; Andreas Hansch
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 2.357

6.  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 7.  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

8.  Safety of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Cardiac Devices.

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

9.  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

10.  Clinical utility and safety of a protocol for noncardiac and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging of patients with permanent pacemakers and implantable-cardioverter defibrillators at 1.5 tesla.

Authors:  Saman Nazarian; Ariel Roguin; Menekhem M Zviman; Albert C Lardo; Timm L Dickfeld; Hugh Calkins; Robert G Weiss; Ronald D Berger; David A Bluemke; Henry R Halperin
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-09-11       Impact factor: 29.690

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.