Magnetic resonance imaging and cardiac pacemaker safety at 1.5-Tesla
| Autor: | Christopher C Pulling, James A. Coman, Kim Jenkins, Frank G. Shellock, Edward T. Martin, Robert Fair |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2004 |
| Předmět: |
Pacemaker
Artificial Time Factors Heart Ventricles medicine.medical_treatment Statistics as Topic Mri studies Risk Assessment Cardiac pacemaker Electrocardiography Clinical information medicine Humans Heart Atria Prospective Studies Lead (electronics) Contraindication Equipment Safety medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Contraindications Cardiac Pacing Artificial Arrhythmias Cardiac Oklahoma Magnetic resonance imaging Equipment Design Magnetic Resonance Imaging Radiography Cardiac chamber Multivariate Analysis Implant Nuclear medicine business Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine |
| Zdroj: | Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 43(7):1315-1324 |
| ISSN: | 0735-1097 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.jacc.2003.12.016 |
| Popis: | OBJECTIVES The study was done to determine whether patients with pacemakers could safely undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 1.5-Tesla (T). BACKGROUND Because of theoretical risks, it is an absolute contraindication for a patient with a pacemaker to undergo MRI. However, there are times when an MRI is needed to provide valuable clinical information. METHODS Fifty-four patients underwent a total of 62 MRI examinations at 1.5-T. The type of MRI examination was not limited and included cardiac, vascular, and general MRI studies using various whole-body averaged specific absorption rate (SAR) of radiofrequency power. Restrictions were not placed on the type of pacemaker present in the patient. All pacemakers were interrogated immediately before and after MRI scanning, and patients were continuously monitored. Before and after MRI, interrogation was done, and pacing and sensing thresholds, as well as lead impedances, were all measured. RESULTS A total of 107 leads and 61 pulse generators were evaluated. No adverse events occurred. Forty (37%) of the leads underwent changes, whereas 10 (9.4%) leads underwent a significant change. Only 2 of the 107 (1.9%) leads required a change in programmed output. Threshold changes were unrelated to cardiac chamber, anatomical location, peak SAR, and time from lead implant to the MRI examination. Electrocardiographic changes and patient symptoms were minor and did not require cessation of MRI. CONCLUSIONS Safety was demonstrated in this series of patients with pacemakers at 1.5-T. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|