Key result
Electronic dental instruments caused no interference in pacemaker pacing or sensing function (0%), though surface ECG interference occurred in 37.9% of patients.
Why the study?
Does exposure to electronic dental equipment cause electromagnetic interference with pacemaker function in non-pacemaker-dependent patients?
Observational (n=66)
Does exposure to electronic dental equipment cause electromagnetic interference with pacemaker function in non-pacemaker-dependent patients?
Commonly used electronic dental instruments do not interfere with pacemaker function in vivo, indicating they are safe for use in patients with pacemakers.
Supports safe use of electronic dental instruments in pacemaker patients; leaves open need for prospective validation.
In-vitro studies suggest that electromagnetic interference can occur under specific conditions involving proximity between electronic dental equipment and pacemakers. At present, in-vivo investigations to verify the effect of using electronic dental equipment in clinical conditions on patients with pacemakers are scarce. This study aimed to evaluate, in vivo, the effect of three commonly used electronic dental instruments - ultrasonic dental scaler, electric pulp tester, and electronic apex locator - on patients with different pacemaker brands and configurations. Sixty-six consecutive non-pacemaker-dependent patients were enrolled during regular electrophysiology follow-up visits. Electronic dental tools were operated while the pacemaker was interrogated, and the intracardiac electrogram and electrocardiogram were recorded. No interferences were detected in the intracardiac electrogram of any patient during the tests with dental equipment. No abnormalities in pacemaker pacing and sensing function were observed, and no differences were found with respect to the variables, pacemaker brands, pacemaker configuration, or mode of application of the dental equipment. Electromagnetic interferences affecting the surface electrocardiogram, but not the intracardiac electrogram, were found in 25 (37.9%) patients, especially while using the ultrasonic dental scaler; the intrinsic function of the pacemakers was not affected. Under real clinical conditions, none of the electronic dental instruments tested interfered with pacemaker function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Conde‐Mir et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Patients with pacemakers (n=66). Electronic dental instruments (ultrasonic dental scaler, electric pulp tester, and electronic apex locator) was evaluated on Interference in intracardiac electrogram and pacemaker pacing and sensing function. Electronic dental instruments caused no interference in pacemaker pacing or sensing function (0%), though surface ECG interference occurred in 37.9% of patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: