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
. 2023 May 19;25(5):euad042.
doi: 10.1093/europace/euad042.

High-power chargers for electric vehicles: are they safe for patients with pacemakers and defibrillators?

Carsten Lennerz  1   2 , Claudia Schaarschmidt  1 , Patrick Blažek  1 , Katharina Knoll  1   2 , Marc Kottmaier  1   2 , Tilko Reents  1 , Felix Bourier  1 , Sarah Lengauer  1 , Miruna Popa  1 , Katharina Wimbauer  1 , Fabian Bahlke  1 , Hannah Krafft  1 , Florian Englert  1 , Lena Friedrich  1 , Heribert Schunkert  2   3 , Gabriele Hessling  1 , Isabel Deisenhofer  1 , Christof Kolb  1 , Matthew O'Connor  4
Affiliations

High-power chargers for electric vehicles: are they safe for patients with pacemakers and defibrillators?

Carsten Lennerz et al. Europace. .

Abstract

Aims: Battery electric vehicle (BEV) sales and use are rapidly expanding. Battery electric vehicles, along with their charging stations, are a potential source of electromagnetic interference (EMI) for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). The new 'high-power' charging stations have the potential to create strong electromagnetic fields and induce EMI in CIEDs, and their safety has not been evaluated.

Methods and results: A total of 130 CIED patients performed 561 charges of four BEVs and a test vehicle (350 kW charge capacity) using high-power charging stations under continuous 6-lead electrocardiogram monitoring. The charging cable was placed directly over the CIED, and devices were programmed to maximize the chance of EMI detection. Cardiac implantable electronic devices were re-interrogated after patients charged all BEVs and the test vehicle for evidence of EMI. There were no incidences of EMI, specifically no over-sensing, pacing inhibition, inappropriate tachycardia detection, mode switching, or spontaneous reprogramming. The risk of EMI on a patient-based analysis is 0/130 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0%-2%], and the risk of EMI on a charge-based analysis is 0/561 (95% CI 0%-0.6%). The effective magnetic field along the charging cable was 38.65 µT and at the charging station was 77.9 µT.

Conclusions: The use of electric cars with high-power chargers by patients with cardiac devices appears to be safe with no evidence of clinically relevant EMI. Reasonable caution, by minimizing the time spent in close proximity with the charging cables, is still advised as the occurrence of very rare events cannot be excluded from our results.

Keywords: Cardiac implantable electronic device; Electric cars; Electromagnetic interference; High-power chargers; Implantable cardioverter defibrillator; Pacemaker.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: C.L. has received travel and/or lecture honorary support from Biotronik. P.B. has received travel and/or lecture honorary support from Abbott Medical and Biotronik. C.K. has received travel support and/or lecture honorary from Biotronik, Microport, has participated in clinical studies supported by Abbott Medical, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Mircoport and has served as advisor to Microport. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Structured graphical abstract
Structured graphical abstract
Figure 1
Figure 1
Illustration of the charging procedure, as a worst-case scenario the participants positioned the charging cable in close proximity to the CIED. Charging of four representative full battery electric cars: (A) Porsche Taycan Turbo, (B) Tesla Model 3 performance, (C) VW ID.3 pro performance, and (D) Audi E-tron 55 Quattro. CIED, cardiac implantable electronic device.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Illustration of the magnetic field strength at various locations along the charger components [including charging station, charging cable, and CCS connector and the location of the maximum (as RMS values)] for the magnetic field strength. CCS, combined charging system; RMS, root mean square.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Charging behaviour relative to the SOC of each tested BEV. SOC, state of charge; BEV, battery electric vehicle.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Mond HG, Proclemer A. The 11th world survey of cardiac pacing and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: calendar year 2009-A world society of arrhythmia’s project. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2011;34:1013–27. - PubMed
    1. Greenspon AJ, Patel JD, Lau E, Ochoa JA, Frisch DR, Ho RTet al. . 16-Year trends in the infection burden for pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in the United States: 1993 to 2008. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1001–6. - PubMed
    1. Hatala R, Lunati M, Calvi V, Favale S, Goncalvesová E, Haim Met al. . Clinical implementation of cardiac resynchronization therapy-regional disparities across selected ESC member countries. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol 2015;20:43–52. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rickli H, Facchini M, Brunner H, Ammann P, Sagmeister M, Klaus Get al. . Induction ovens and electromagnetic interference: what is the risk for patients with implanted pacemakers? Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2003;26:1494–7. - PubMed
    1. Driessen S, Napp A, Schmiedchen K, Kraus T, Stunder D. Electromagnetic interference in cardiac electronic implants caused by novel electrical appliances emitting electromagnetic fields in the intermediate frequency range: a systematic review. Europace 2019;21:219–29. - PMC - PubMed