Security millimetre wave body scanner safe for patients with leadless pacemakers or subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2020 · No effect · Low evidence

← Research stream

No effectLow evidencePaper 1415

Study snapshot

PublicationJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2020

Study typecohort

Reported directionNo effect

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Security millimetre wave body scanner safe for patients with leadless pacemakers or subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators Patrick Blažek, Matthew J O'Connor, Severin Weigand, Christian Grebmer, Sebastian Reif, et al. Security millimetre wave body scanner safe for patients with leadless pacemakers or subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020 Aug 29. doi: 10.1007/s10840-020-00830-x. Abstract Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the electromagnetic interference (EMI) effects and safety of the new security screening millimetre wave body scanners (MWBSs) for patients with rare cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Methods: We identified 73 patients with either entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S- ICD) or leadless pacemakers (LPM) attending routine device follow-up. CIED programming was optimised for the detection of EMI occurrence, and high-voltage therapy was disabled. Patients then underwent millimetre wave body scans under continuous ECG monitoring. Scanning was performed at the recommended distance as well as in close proximity to the scanner emulating accidental exposure. CIED function was observed for EMI effects. Results: There were no episodes of inhibition of pacing in the leadless pacemaker subgroup, no oversensing in the S-ICD subgroup and no spontaneous device reprogramming in any group. There was no change in pacing or sensing thresholds, and S-ICD vector eligibility remained unchanged after scanning with the MWBS. No CIEDs were identified by the MWBS during the study. Conclusion: No EMI events were detected during the use of MWBSs by patients with either S-ICDs or LPMs. This data should be reassuring for patients suggesting that they can undergo security body scans without worries or disclosure of their CIED status. 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 typecohort

Effect directionno_effect

PopulationPatients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICD) or leadless pacemakers (LPM) attending routine device follow-up

Sample size73

ExposuremmWave

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

In 73 patients with S-ICDs or leadless pacemakers undergoing millimetre wave body scans (at recommended distance and in close proximity), no EMI events were detected: no pacing inhibition in the leadless pacemaker subgroup, no oversensing in the S-ICD subgroup, and no spontaneous device reprogramming. No changes in pacing/sensing thresholds or S-ICD vector eligibility were observed, and no CIEDs were identified by the scanner.

Outcomes measured

Electromagnetic interference (EMI) events (e.g., pacing inhibition, oversensing)
Spontaneous device reprogramming
Changes in pacing thresholds
Changes in sensing thresholds
S-ICD vector eligibility
Whether CIEDs were identified/detected by the millimetre wave body scanner

Limitations

High-voltage therapy was disabled during testing
Frequency and other exposure parameters of the millimetre wave body scanner were not reported in the abstract
Study limited to specific rare CIED types (S-ICD and leadless pacemakers)

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "cohort",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "mmWave",
    "source": "security millimetre wave body scanner",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICD) or leadless pacemakers (LPM) attending routine device follow-up",
  "sample_size": 73,
  "outcomes": [
    "Electromagnetic interference (EMI) events (e.g., pacing inhibition, oversensing)",
    "Spontaneous device reprogramming",
    "Changes in pacing thresholds",
    "Changes in sensing thresholds",
    "S-ICD vector eligibility",
    "Whether CIEDs were identified/detected by the millimetre wave body scanner"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In 73 patients with S-ICDs or leadless pacemakers undergoing millimetre wave body scans (at recommended distance and in close proximity), no EMI events were detected: no pacing inhibition in the leadless pacemaker subgroup, no oversensing in the S-ICD subgroup, and no spontaneous device reprogramming. No changes in pacing/sensing thresholds or S-ICD vector eligibility were observed, and no CIEDs were identified by the scanner.",
  "effect_direction": "no_effect",
  "limitations": [
    "High-voltage therapy was disabled during testing",
    "Frequency and other exposure parameters of the millimetre wave body scanner were not reported in the abstract",
    "Study limited to specific rare CIED types (S-ICD and leadless pacemakers)"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "millimetre wave body scanner",
    "mmWave",
    "security screening",
    "electromagnetic interference",
    "EMI",
    "cardiac implantable electronic devices",
    "CIED",
    "subcutaneous ICD",
    "S-ICD",
    "leadless pacemaker",
    "ECG monitoring"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0.2,
      "reason": "Study concerns safety/EMI from a millimetre-wave exposure source; could inform broader exposure safety discussions."
    }
  ]
}

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/s10840-020-00830-x
PubMed: 32860605

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library