Key result
Smartphones with magnetic wireless charging show no interference with contemporary leadless pacemakers.
Why the study?
Magnetic wireless charging in smartphones can cause magnet-triggered responses in transvenous CIEDs, but evidence regarding potential interference with contemporary leadless pacemakers is lacking.
Does exposure to smartphones with magnetic wireless charging systems cause interference in contemporary leadless pacemakers?
Does exposure to smartphones with magnetic wireless charging systems cause interference in contemporary leadless pacemakers?
Contemporary leadless pacemakers appear resistant to magnetic interference from smartphones with wireless charging systems, suggesting current distance recommendations for transvenous systems may not apply to LPMs.
No interference in this small series is hypothesis-generating; larger prospective studies needed before any practice implications.
Background Magnetic wireless charging technologies in smartphones create localized magnetic fields that may interfere with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Magnet-triggered responses have been reported in transvenous systems, but evidence regarding interactions with leadless pacemakers (LPMs) is lacking. Purpose To evaluate potential interference between smartphones equipped with magnetic wireless charging systems and contemporary LPMs under controlled preclinical conditions. Methods Six LPMs were tested: four Medtronic Micra devices (two VR2, two AV2) and two Abbott Aveir VR. Each was immersed separately in an electrically isolated chamber filled with iso-osmotic electrolyte solution at 25 °C, allowing continuous surface ECG and intracardiac electrogram recording. Standard ventricular pacing modes were programmed (OVO and VVI 50 bpm for Micra VR2 and Aveir VR; OVO, VVI, VDD 50 bpm for Micra AV2) with maximal sensitivity settings (0.45–0.5 mV). Apple Iphone 14 and 16 Pro smartphones with magnetic charging systems were positioned at 1, 5, 10, and 15 cm from the device surface, both with and without magnetic cases, during idle mode and simulated incoming calls. All tests were performed in an electromagnetically isolated environment. Results Across all devices, operational modes, and exposure distances, no evidence of interference was observed. There were no pacing interruptions, oversensing, telemetry disturbances, or artifacts on surface or intracardiac recordings. The presence of a magnetic phone case did not affect these results. Conclusions Under realistic exposure conditions, contemporary LPMs appear resistant to magnetic interference from smartphones with wireless charging systems. Our findings suggest that existing recommendations for smartphone distance from transvenous systems may not directly apply to LPMs. Further in-vivo validation is warranted to verify the device-specific safety guidelines as magnetic charging technologies are developing rapidly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dyrbus et al. (2026) studied Leadless pacemakers (n=6). Smartphones with magnetic wireless charging systems was evaluated on Magnetic interference (pacing interruptions, oversensing, telemetry disturbances, or artifacts). Exposure of contemporary leadless pacemakers to smartphones with magnetic wireless charging systems resulted in no evidence of interference, pacing interruptions, or oversensing.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: