Perioperative and Periprocedural Management, Electromagnetic Interference, and Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

2017 ◽  
pp. 1158-1174
Author(s):  
Jordan M. Prutkin ◽  
Jeanne E. Poole
Keyword(s):  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Periprocedural Management ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

Electric Cars and Electromagnetic Interference With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: A Cross-sectional Evaluation

2018 ◽  
Vol 169 (5) ◽  
pp. 350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Lennerz ◽  
Matthew O'Connor ◽  
Lorenz Horlbeck ◽  
Jonathan Michel ◽  
Severin Weigand ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Electric Cars ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

scholarly journals Modern Security Screening and Electromagnetic Interference With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (10) ◽  
pp. 1238-1239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Lennerz ◽  
Matthew J. O’Connor ◽  
Patrick Blažek ◽  
Severin Weigand ◽  
Christian Grebmer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Security Screening ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

Safety of smartwatches and their chargers in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices

EP Europace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stylianos Tzeis ◽  
Dimitrios Asvestas ◽  
Nektarios Moraitis ◽  
Emmanuel P Vardas ◽  
Panagiotis Mililis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Magnetic Flux Density ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators ◽  
Case Scenario ◽  
Worst Case ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices ◽  
Background Noise Level

Abstract Aims Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are susceptible to electromagnetic interference (EMI). Smartwatches and their chargers could be a possible source of EMI. We sought to assess whether the latest generation smartwatches and their chargers interfere with proper CIED function. Methods and results We included consecutive CIED recipients in two centres. We tested two latest generation smartwatches (Apple Watch and Samsung Galaxy Watch) and their charging cables for potential EMI. The testing was performed under continuous electrocardiogram recording and real-time device telemetry, with nominal and ‘worst-case’ settings. In vitro magnetic field measurements were performed to assess the emissions from the tested devices, initially in contact with the probe and then at a distance of 10 cm and 20 cm. In total, 171 patients with CIEDs (71.3% pacemakers–28.7% implantable cardioverter-defibrillators) from five manufacturers were enrolled (63.2% males, 74.8 ± 11.4 years), resulting in 684 EMI tests. No EMI was identified in any patient either under nominal or ‘worst-case scenario’ programming. The peak magnetic flux density emitted by the smartwatches was similar to the background noise level (0.81 μT) even when in contact with the measuring probe. The respective values for the chargers were 4.696 μΤ and 4.299 μΤ for the Samsung and Apple chargers, respectively, which fell at the background noise level when placed at 20 cm and 10 cm, respectively. Conclusion Two latest generation smartwatches and their chargers resulted in no EMI in CIED recipients. The absence of EMI in conjunction with the extremely low intensity of magnetic fields emitted by these devices support the safety of their use by CIED patients.

scholarly journals Electromagnetic Interference in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Lennerz ◽  
Herribert Pavaci ◽  
Christian Grebmer ◽  
Verena Semmler ◽  
Felix Bourier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

scholarly journals Effect of electroMagnetic Interference from smartPHone On cardiac implaNtable Electronic device (EMI-PHONE study)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanatcha Apakuppakul ◽  
Sirin Apiyasawat ◽  
Nilubon Methachittiphan
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Electronic Device ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Lead Level ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device ◽  
Current Generation ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices ◽  
Ventricular Lead ◽  
Icd Shock

Abstract Background: Smartphones can emit two types of electromagnetic waves, static field from magnet and dynamic field from calling. Previous evidence showed the interference effects from old generation of mobile phones to cardiac implantable electronic device (CIEDs). The current generation of smartphones and CIEDs are reportedly better designed to reduce electromagnetic interference (EMI). We seek to find the presence and the magnitude of EMI from the current generation of smartphones. Objectives: The primary objective was to find out the presence and the effect of electromagnetic interference from current generation smartphones on cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). The secondary objectives were to demonstrate safety of using current generation smartphones on cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Methods: A total of 80 subjects with CIEDs (Pacemaker, ICD, CRT-D, CRT-P) were recruited from our CIEDs clinic. Each subject was tested with three different smartphones (Nokia 3310, Iphone 7, and Samsung Galaxy S9), resulted in a total of 240 tests. Each phone was placed on chest wall, at pulse generator site, at atrial lead level, and at ventricular lead level. During the tests, real-time interrogations were performed to detect any EMI from smartphones in stand-by mode, and during calling-in and out for 30 seconds. After the tests, post-test interrogation was performed to detect any parameters changes. Adverse events including pacemaker inhibition, false ICD shock, CIEDs device malfunction, and urgent electro- physiologist consultations were recorded. Results: 80 subjects (Mean age 70.5 year-old, 50% male) were recruited in the study, and all completed 240 tests according to our protocol. The most common type of CIEDs tested was pacemaker (N=56, 70%), followed by ICD (N=16, 20%), and CRT (N=8, 10%). Most patients (N=62, 77.5%) had more than one lead implanted. The mean age of CIEDs implantation was 5.2 years (Devices were implanted since 2008-2019). Of all the tests performed, no electromagnetic interference (EMI) or adverse events was observed. Conclusion: Current generation of smartphones have no EMI effect to CIEDs and can be used safely without any adverse events including pacemaker inhibition, false ICD shock and CIEDs malfunction.

scholarly journals Possibilities and safety measures for the use of physiotherapy in patients with implanted antiarrhythmic devices

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 17-23
Author(s):  
B. G. Iskenderov ◽  
T. V. Lokhina ◽  
I. N. Mozhzhukhina ◽  
A. V. Zaitseva
Keyword(s):  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Safety Measures ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

The factors that can potentially cause electromagnetic interference (EMI) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) during various methods of physiotherapy are considered. The mechanisms of CIED dysfunctions caused by EMI and safety measures for the use of physiotherapeutic treatment are discussed.

scholarly journals Electromagnetic Interference and Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

2019 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-213
Author(s):  
Mohit K. Turagam ◽  
Thomas Deering ◽  
Mina Chung ◽  
Jie Cheng ◽  
John Fisher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

scholarly journals Electromagnetic Field Associated With Dermoscope Magnets May Affect the Safety of Cardiac Implanted Electronic Devices Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grzegorz Sławiński ◽  
Martyna Sławińska ◽  
Zbigniew Usarek ◽  
Michał Sobjanek ◽  
Maciej Kempa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Field ◽  
Electromagnetic Interference ◽  
Measuring Equipment ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Safe Distance ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices ◽  
Contact Plate ◽  
Lift Off ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Magnetic Field

Dermoscopy is currently used as an auxiliary tool in general dermatology. Since some commercially available dermoscopes have built-in magnets, electromagnetic interference (EMI) may occur when examining cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) patients. The aim of the study was to create maps of electromagnetic fields defining a safe distance in terms of EMI. The study was performed in laboratory conditions using measuring equipment specially designed for this purpose. The following dermoscopes have been tested: Illuco IDS-1100, Visiomed Luminis, Visiomed Luminis 2, Heine NC2 with and without a contact plate, DermLite DL4, and DermLite Handyscope. Measurements were made for the following set of lift-off distances: 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 150 mm. Each 2D scan consisted of 10-line scans shifted from each other by 10 mm. The strength of the magnetic field decreased with the distance from the faceplate. The distribution of the magnetic field differed depending on the position of the magnets. The highest magnetic field was recorded in the center of the Heine NC2 faceplate (up to 8 mT). In most cases, at a distance of 10 mm, the magnetic field strength was measured below 1 mT, with the exception of Heine NC2 and Heine NC2 with a contact plate. All tested dermoscopes generated a magnetic field of <1 mT at the distance of 20 mm. The use of dermoscopes with built-in magnets may affect the functioning of CIEDs, and the impact may vary depending on the type of dermoscope.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document