Key result
Magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T in 7 patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators resulted in no permanent device impairment when appropriate reprogramming and monitoring were used.
Why the study?
Does screening, reprogramming, and monitoring prevent device malfunction in patients with ICDs undergoing MRI?
Observational (n=7)
Does screening, reprogramming, and monitoring prevent device malfunction in patients with ICDs undergoing MRI?
MRI scanning at 1.5 T in selected ICD patients appears feasible and safe when appropriate screening, reprogramming, and monitoring strategies are implemented.
MRI at 1.5 T may be feasible in selected ICD patients with protocols; leaves open larger prospective validation.
OBJECTIVE: To determine if simple strategies used to safely scan pacemaker patients could be applied to implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), patients undergoing MRI allowing ICD patients to undergo MRI as well. INTERVENTIONS: Screening, reprogramming, and monitoring strategies were used to facilitate MRI. RESULTS: Seven patients underwent eight MRI scans at 1.5 T. Post-MRI, all devices demonstrated no change in pacing, sensing, impedances, charge times, or battery status. The patient undergoing a lumbar spine scan experienced a "power-on-reset" of his ICD without permanent impairment of his device. CONCLUSION: Scanning of ICD patients might be performed if appropriate reprogramming and monitoring is implemented.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gimbel et al. (2005) conducted an observational in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICDs) (n=7). Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) with screening, reprogramming, and monitoring was evaluated on Change in pacing, sensing, impedances, charge times, or battery status post-MRI. Magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T in 7 patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators resulted in no permanent device impairment when appropriate reprogramming and monitoring were used.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: