PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 1, 2005Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology61 citations

Is Magnetic Resonance Imaging Safe in Cardiac Pacemaker Recipients?

View Full Paper
JOJuan Leal del OjoFMFrancisco MoyaJVJ Villalba

Key Result

Performing 2.0 T-MRI scans in non-pacemaker-dependent patients with Affinity DR model 5330 pacemakers and Tendril model 1388 leads was safe, with no significant changes in pacing functions.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=13)

Structured PICO

Is 2.0 T-MRI safe and does it alter pacing functions in non-pacemaker-dependent patients with Affinity DR model 5330 pacemakers and Tendril model 1388 leads?

P
Population
13 non-pacemaker-dependent patients with specific pacemaker models (Affinity DR 5330 and Tendril 1388 leads) who underwent 2.0 T-MRI.
E
Exposure
2.0 T-MRI scan with pacemaker programmed in DDD mode and bipolar sensing configuration
O
Outcome
Pacing functions (sensing, stimulation, AutoCapture threshold, lead impedance) and adverse effects before and after MRI exposuresafety

This small prospective study suggests that 2.0 T-MRI may be safely performed in non-pacemaker-dependent patients with specific pacemaker and lead models, challenging the general contraindication.

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is currently contraindicated in cardiac pacemaker (PM) recipients. The objectives of this prospective study were to (1) reassess the risks of performing an MRI scan in patients with PM, (2) compared the pacing functions before and after the exposure to MRI, and (3) monitor the development of possible adverse effects. Thirteen patients implanted with an Affinity DR model 5330 PMs (St. Jude Medical) connected to a Tendril model 1388 leads (St. Jude Medical) underwent 2.0 T-MRI for a variety of indications. All patients displayed a stable spontaneous rhythm at the time of the MRI scan and were not considered to be PM-dependent. The sensing and pacing functions were analyzed and the impedance of both leads was measured before and after the scan. The MRI scan was performed with all PM programmed in DDD mode. The sensing configuration was bipolar. All patients were monitored utilizing a standard electrocardiographic monitor and direct verbal communication. PM Inhibition, asynchronous pacing, or inappropriately rapid pacing was not observed. No patient reported discomfort, heat, or motion sensation at the PM implant site. There were no significant differences in the sensing, stimulation, AutoCapture threshold, and lead impedance measurements before and after MRI. The results of this study suggest that performing 2.0 T-MRI scans in patients with Affinity DR model 5330 PM connected to a Tendril model 1388 lead is safe.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ojo et al. (2005) conducted an observational in Cardiac pacemaker recipients (n=13). 2.0 T-MRI scan vs. Pre-MRI baseline was evaluated on Adverse effects and changes in sensing, stimulation, AutoCapture threshold, and lead impedance. Performing 2.0 T-MRI scans in non-pacemaker-dependent patients with Affinity DR model 5330 pacemakers and Tendril model 1388 leads was safe, with no significant changes in pacing functions.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a20014d35281a23f90dc466https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.2005.50033.x
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper