Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Implantable Devices
Section of Cardiac Electrophysiology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.Circulation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology (Impact Factor: 5.42). 04/2013; 6(2):419-428. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCEP.113.000116
- Heart rhythm: the official journal of the Heart Rhythm Society 10/2013; 10(12). DOI:10.1016/j.hrthm.2013.10.050 · 4.92 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has evolved into an essential diagnostic modality for the evaluation of all patient categories. This gain in popularity coincided with an increase in the number of implanted cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Therefore, questions arose with regard to the MRI compatibility of these devices. Various investigators have reported the harmless performance of MRI in patients with conventional (non-MRI conditional) devices. The recently published European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) indicate that MRI can be safely performed in patients with an implanted pacemaker or ICD (MRI conditional or not), as long as strict safety conditions are met. This is a major modification of the former general opinion that patients with a pacemaker or ICD were not eligible to undergo MRI. This review paper attempts to elucidate the current situation for practising cardiologists by providing a clear overview of the potential life-threatening interactions and discuss safety measures to be taken prior to and during scanning. An overview of all available MRI conditional devices and their individual restrictions is given. In addition, an up-to-date safety protocol is provided that can be used to ensure patient safety before, during and after the scan. Key points • Historically, MRI examination of patients with a CIED has been considered hazardous. • Ongoing advances in technology and increasing usage of MRI in clinical practice have led to the introduction of MRI conditional CIEDs and to more lenient regulations on the examination of patients with non-conditional CIEDs. • MRI investigations can be performed safely in selected patients when adhering to a standardised up-to-date safety protocol.Netherlands heart journal: monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation 04/2014; 22(6). DOI:10.1007/s12471-014-0544-x · 2.26 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) is the gold standard for myocardial scar evaluation. Although ideal for substrate assessment in ventricular tachycardia (VT), most patients have an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) at presentation for ablation. This study evaluates the ICD artifact burden during standard late gadolinium enhancement CMRI (LGE-CMRI) evaluation of myocardial scar in VT patients with ICDs. Thirty-one patients with ICD and cardiomyopathy underwent LGE-CMRI using 1.5-T magnetic resonance scanner before VT ablation. Using the American Heart Association (AHA) 17-segment model, short-axis LGE series were analyzed for artifact burden localization and assessment. Preablation CMRI was performed in 31 patients with single chamber (n = 13), dual chamber (n = 11), and biventricular (n = 7) ICDs. Pre- and post-MRI ICD parameters were unchanged. All patients had susceptibility artifact and 51.6% (256 of 496) of segments were affected by artifact. The artifact area (178 ± 136 cm(2) ) resulted in an artifact burden of 54 ± 21% of the LV myocardial area (327 ± 15 cm(2) ). The anterior wall was most affected by artifact (89%) compared with 52%, 49%, and 23% in the lateral, septal, and inferior walls, respectively (P < 0.0001). The apical segments had more artifact burden (66%) than the mid (49%) and basal (44%) segments (P = 0.0005). Artifact area correlated with ICD-heart distance on anteroposterior chest radiograph (r = 0.42, P = 0.021) and body mass index (r = -0.48, P = 0.008). Current clinical LGE-CMRI scar imaging protocols produce ICD artifacts that affect >50% of the LV myocardium and correlate with the ICD-heart distance. This significantly limits the application of CMRI for image-guided VT ablation.Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 04/2014; 37(10). DOI:10.1111/pace.12405 · 1.25 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.