This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Google Scholar Articles by Potkin, B. Articles by Potkin, S. PubMed Articles by Potkin, B. Articles by Potkin, S.

(Circulation. 2008;118:S_596.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.

Treatment of Arrhythmias: ICD/Pacemaker-Excluding CRT I

Abstract 663: Electromagnetic Effects on Pacemaker and Defibrillator Performance from Airport Security System and Personal Electronic Devices

Benjamin Potkin; Robert O Donovan; Shelby Potkin

Monterey Bay Heart Cntr, Aptos, CA

Introduction: To study whether electromagnetic interference (EMI) can be associated with major clinical adverse outcomes or alter subsequent tachy/brady device performance, we studied 53 ICD and 60 pacemaker dependent patients (PD).

Methods: EMIs were produced and evaluated from personal electronic devices (PED) I-pod Nano, I-phone in music, video and phone modes, Motorola cell phone with and without Bluetooth headset, electric blanket and hand held airport security metal detector (SMD) after informed consent was obtained. Each EMI producing device was tested contralateral, ipsilateral, and directly on the generator for one minute. Devices were tested in bipolar configuration. Atrial and ventricular sensitivities were set at 0.5 and 2.5 mV. Intracardiac, surface EKGs and patient clinical events were monitored. An interaction was categorized as total obliteration of telemetry (TOT), telemetry interference (TI) or over sensing (OS). TI was defined as spurious change in baseline intracardiac EKG. OS was defined as a spurious change in baseline intracardiac EKG associated with inhibition of pacing in PD and/or declaration of tachycardia in ICD patients. Pacemakers and ICDs had baseline interrogation and were reanalyzed after and again within 120 days of initial testing.

Results: Of the 113 patients (mean age 76; 44F, 69M), 72 were PD (60 pacers and 12 of the 53 ICD patients. TI was identified in 18 out of 60 pacemaker patients and 4 out of 53 ICD patients. TOT was observed with SMD only and in all 113 patients without inhibition of pacing or a declared tachycardia episode. There was no OS observed in any of the 113 patients with PED.

Conclusions: TOT was observed in all 113 patients without clinical adverse outcome (no inhibition of pacing or a declared tachycardia episode) with SMD. Electric blanket EMI caused interference in surface EKG in all 113 patients without causing any TOT, TI or OS. With PED, TI was observed in 25% of PD and 7.5% of ICD patients. EMIs produced caused no inhibition of pacing or declaration of tachycardia in any of 113 patients. Our study suggests that the EMIs created from tested PED and SMD had no immediate or late clinical adverse outcome on pacemaker dependent or ICD patients.

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Google Scholar Articles by Potkin, B. Articles by Potkin, S. PubMed Articles by Potkin, B. Articles by Potkin, S.