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
Multicenter Study
. 2015 Jun;12(6):1183-91.
doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.02.010. Epub 2015 Feb 11.

Clinical safety of the ProMRI pacemaker system in patients subjected to head and lower lumbar 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging scanning conditions

William M Bailey  1 , Lawrence Rosenthal  2 , Lameh Fananapazir  3 , Marye Gleva  4 , Alexander Mazur  5 , C A Rinaldi  6 , Alexander Kypta  7 , Béla Merkely  8 , Pamela K Woodard  4 ; ProMRI/ProMRI AFFIRM Study Investigators
Collaborators, Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Clinical safety of the ProMRI pacemaker system in patients subjected to head and lower lumbar 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging scanning conditions

William M Bailey et al. Heart Rhythm. 2015 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Permanent cardiac pacemakers have historically been considered a contraindication to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Objective: The purpose of the ProMRI/ProMRI AFFIRM Study, which was a multicenter, prospective, single-arm, nonrandomized study, was to evaluate the clinical safety of the Biotronik ProMRI Pacemaker System under specific MRI conditions.

Methods: The ProMRI Study (in the United States) and the ProMRI AFFIRM study (outside the United States) with identical design enrolled 272 patients with stable baseline pacing indices implanted with an Entovis or Evia pacemaker (DR-T or SR-T) and Setrox or Safio 53-cm or 60-cm lead. Device interrogation was performed at enrollment, pre-MRI and post-MRI scan, and 1 and 3 months post-MRI. End-points were (1) freedom from MRI- and pacing system-related serious adverse device effects (SADEs) through 1 month post-MRI, (2) freedom from atrial and ventricular MRI-induced pacing threshold increase (>0.5 V), and (3) freedom from P- and R-wave amplitude attenuation (<50%), or P wave <1.5 mV, or R wave <5.0 mV at 1 month post-MRI.

Results: Two hundred twenty-six patients completed the MRI and 1-month post-MRI follow-up. No adverse events related to the implanted system and the MRI procedure occurred, resulting in an SADE-free rate of 100.0% (229/229, P <.001). Freedom from atrial and ventricular pacing threshold increase was 99.0% (189/191, P = .003) and 100% (217/217, P <.001), respectively. Freedom from P- and R- wave amplitude attenuation was 99.4% (167/168, P <.001) and 99.5% (193/194, P <.001), respectively.

Conclusion: The results of the ProMRI/ProMRI AFFIRM studies demonstrate the clinical safety and efficacy of the ProMRI pacemaker system in patients subjected to head and lower lumbar MRI conditions.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01460992 NCT01761162.

Keywords: Bradycardia pacing; Clinical trial; Entovis; Evia; Magnetic resonance imaging; Pacemaker; ProMRI; Safety.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

Associated data