Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar;23(3):e13520.
doi: 10.1002/acm2.13520. Epub 2022 Jan 23.

Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices with generator and lead(s) brand mismatch

Nareg Minaskeian  1 , Sofia P Hajnal  1 , Michael B Liu  1 , Lindsay M Klooster  1 , Katrina L Devick  1 , Linda Schwartz  1 , Clinton E Jokerst  1 , Dan Sorajja  1 , Luis Rp Scott  1
Affiliations

Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices with generator and lead(s) brand mismatch

Nareg Minaskeian et al. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Mar.

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a valuable imaging modality for the assessment of both cardiac and non-cardiac structures. With a growing population of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), 50%-75% of these patients will need an MRI. MRI-conditional CIEDs have demonstrated safety of MRI scanning with such devices, yet non-conditional devices such as hybrid CIEDs which have generator and lead brand mismatch may pose a safety risk. In this retrospective study, we examined the outcomes of patients with hybrid CIEDs undergoing MRI compared to those patients with non-hybrid CIEDs. A total of 349 patients were included, of which 24 patients (7%) had hybrid CIEDs. The primary endpoint was the safety of MRI for patients with hybrid CIEDs as compared to those with non-hybrid devices, measured by the rate of adverse events, including death, lead or generator failure needing immediate replacement, loss of capture, new onset arrhythmia, or power-on reset. Secondary endpoints consisted of pre- and post-MRI changes of decreased P-wave or R-wave sensing by ≥50%, changes in pacing lead impedance by ≥50 ohms, increase in pacing thresholds by ≥ 0.5 V at 0.4 ms, and decreasing battery voltage of ≥ 0.04 V. The primary endpoint of any adverse reaction was present in 1 (4.2%) patient with a hybrid device, and consistent of atrial tachyarrhythmia, and in 10 (3.1%) patients with a non-hybrid device, and consisted of self-limited atrial and non-sustained ventricular arrhythmias; this was not statistically significant. No significant differences were found in the secondary endpoints. This study demonstrates that MRI in patients with hybrid CIEDs does not result in increased patient risk or significant device changes when compared to those patients who underwent MRI with non-hybrid CIEDs.

Keywords: MRI; cardiac implantable electronic device; safety.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
A summary of the generator, RA lead, and RV lead manufacturers for the 24 hybrid devices. Squares with “—” are those without an RA lead. No hybrid devices included LV leads
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Roguin A, Schwitter J, Vahlhaus C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in individuals with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Europace. 2008(10):336‐346. - PubMed
    1. Cohen JD, Costa HS, Russo RJ. Determining the risks of magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 tesla for patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110(11):1631‐1636. - PubMed
    1. Greenspon AJ, Patel JD, Lau E, et al. Trends in permanent pacemaker implantation in the United States from 1993 to 2009: increasing complexity of patients and procedures. Am J Cardiol. 2012;60(16):1540‐1545. - PubMed
    1. Nordbeck P, Ertl G, Ritter O. Magnetic resonance imaging safety in pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients: how far have we come? Eur Heart J. 2015;36(24):1505‐1511. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gillam MH, Inacio MCS, Pratt NL, Shabik S, Roughead EE. Magnetic resonance imaging in people with cardiac implantable electronic devices: a population based cohort study. Heart Lung Circ. 2018;27(6):748‐751. - PubMed