Magnetic field interactions between current consumer electronics and cardiac implantable electronic devices

Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2022 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 814

Study snapshot

PublicationJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2022

Study typeexposure_assessment

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Magnetic field interactions between current consumer electronics and cardiac implantable electronic devices Xu K, Sengupta J, Casey S, Peltier J, Stahl W, Peterson N, Settimi D, Taylor A, Kippola J, Steele E, Hauser R. Magnetic field interactions between current consumer electronics and cardiac implantable electronic devices. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022 May 10. doi: 10.1007/s10840-022-01241-w. Abstract Background: Electronic products, including the iPhone 12, Apple Watch Series 6, and 2nd Generation AirPods, contain magnets to facilitate wireless charging. Permanent magnets may affect CIED magnet mode features by causing pacemakers to pace asynchronously and defibrillators to suspend arrhythmia detection. This study determined if CIEDs are affected by static magnetic fields from commonly used portable electronics (PE) at any distance and intends to reinforce FDA recommendations concerning consumer PE which contain permanent magnets. Methods: The maximum magnet field measurement was evaluated by a Gauss meter. The interaction between PE and CIEDs from Boston Scientific and Medtronic were tested ex vivo using a body torso model. The CIED was placed in physiologic saline, and the PE was placed at the surface and at increasing distances of 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 cm. Interactions were recorded by assessment of magnet mode status. Results: The iPhone 12 had almost three times the static magnetic field measured at the surface as the iPhone XR, but magnetic field strength decreased dramatically with increasing distance. At the surface of the model, PE triggered magnet mode in all CIEDs. The maximum interaction distance for all combinations of CIEDs and Apple products was 1.5 cm. Conclusions: The iPhone 12 produces a stronger static magnetic field than previous iPhone models. Magnets in PE tested will not interact with CIEDs when they are 15 cm from the implanted device. Since no interaction was observed beyond 1.5 cm, it is unlikely that magnet mode activation will occur during most daily activities. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeexposure_assessment

Effect directionmixed

PopulationNot supplied

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureNot supplied

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

In an ex vivo torso model, portable electronics with magnets triggered magnet mode in all tested CIEDs when placed at the surface. The maximum interaction distance reported for combinations of tested CIEDs and Apple products was 1.5 cm, and no interaction was observed beyond 1.5 cm; the authors state magnets will not interact with CIEDs when 15 cm from the implanted device.

Outcomes measured

CIED magnet mode activation (pacemaker asynchronous pacing; defibrillator suspension of arrhythmia detection)
Static magnetic field strength (Gauss meter measurements)
Maximum interaction distance between portable electronics and CIEDs

Limitations

Ex vivo testing using a body torso model rather than in vivo conditions
Limited to specific portable electronics (Apple products) and specific CIED manufacturers (Boston Scientific and Medtronic)
Distances tested were limited (surface, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 cm)

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "exposure_assessment",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "consumer electronics (iPhone 12, Apple Watch Series 6, 2nd Generation AirPods) permanent magnets / static magnetic fields",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "CIED magnet mode activation (pacemaker asynchronous pacing; defibrillator suspension of arrhythmia detection)",
    "Static magnetic field strength (Gauss meter measurements)",
    "Maximum interaction distance between portable electronics and CIEDs"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In an ex vivo torso model, portable electronics with magnets triggered magnet mode in all tested CIEDs when placed at the surface. The maximum interaction distance reported for combinations of tested CIEDs and Apple products was 1.5 cm, and no interaction was observed beyond 1.5 cm; the authors state magnets will not interact with CIEDs when 15 cm from the implanted device.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Ex vivo testing using a body torso model rather than in vivo conditions",
    "Limited to specific portable electronics (Apple products) and specific CIED manufacturers (Boston Scientific and Medtronic)",
    "Distances tested were limited (surface, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 cm)"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "static magnetic field",
    "permanent magnets",
    "wireless charging",
    "iPhone 12",
    "Apple Watch Series 6",
    "AirPods",
    "cardiac implantable electronic devices",
    "pacemaker",
    "implantable cardioverter-defibrillator",
    "magnet mode",
    "ex vivo"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "medical-implants",
      "weight": 0.95,
      "reason": "Study evaluates magnetic interactions between consumer electronics and cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs)."
    },
    {
      "slug": "consumer-electronics",
      "weight": 0.75,
      "reason": "Assesses magnets in common portable electronics (iPhone/Watch/AirPods) and their interaction distances."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1007/s10840-022-01241-w
PubMed: 35538270

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library