Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Many patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) need to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, a significant proportion has a CIED system in place that has not been classified "MRI-conditional" because of generators and leads from different brands ("mixed-brand" group), although the individual components per se are MRI-conditional. There is only limited data available concerning the outcome of these patients with "mixed-brand" CIED systems undergoing MRI. Purpose To analyse complications or adverse effects in "mixed-brand" CIED patients undergoing MRI, compared to patients with a fully "MRI-conditional" CIED system. Methods A retrospective single-centre study was performed, including patients undergoing MRI between January 2013 until May 2020. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between both groups. We defined the primary endpoint as death or any adverse event necessitating hospitalization or CIED revision in association with the MRI examination. Secondary endpoints were the occurrence of any surrogate for beginning device or lead failure or patient discomfort during MRI. Results A total of 227 MRI examinations, including 10 thoracic MRIs, were carried out in 158 patients, with a range of 1-9 MRIs per patient. Mean age was 73 years and 52 (32.9%) patients were female. We identified 38 patients undergoing 54 procedures in the "mixed-brand" group and 89 patients undergoing 134 MRI procedures in the "MRI-conditional" group. In 31 patients undergoing 39 MRI examinations the MRI-conditionality could not be determined. "Mixed-brand" patients were older than MRI-conditional patients (mean 77 vs. 72 years, p = 0.003). The primary endpoint occurred in 0% in the "mixed-brand" group and in 2.2% in the "MRI conditional" group (p = 1.000). Complications were as follows: Two patients had first diagnosed atrial fibrillation directly associated with the procedure, of whom one additionally had a transient CIED dysfunction. No patient in the "mixed-brand" group and three patients (3.4%) in the "MRI conditional" group met the secondary endpoints (p = 0.554). In patients with undeterminable MRI conditionality the complication rate was similar (0% for both the primary and secondary endpoints). Conclusion The complication rate of CIED patients undergoing MRI was low. There was no signal for increased risk of adverse events in patients with a CIED without MRI certification due to mixed brands systems compared to patients with "MRI-conditional" CIED systems.
Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction The first wave of the COVID-19 crisis was associated with a reduction of patients presenting with acute cardiovascular disease. However, there is only limited data showing the trend of pacemaker implantations and their indications. Purpose To evaluate pacemaker implantations before, during and after the first COVID-19 wave, stratified by indication. Methods We analysed the weekly rates of pacemaker implantation at our centre during the first national lockdown for COVID-19 at the between 16 March 2020 and 29 April 2020 (weeks 12-17 / 2020), compared to the implantation rates 6 weeks before (weeks 6-11 / 2020), 6 weeks afterwards (weeks 18-23 / 2020), and the same time frame in 2017-2019. To reduce bias due to postponed planned procedures, we stratified pacemaker implantations into the following groups: total implantations (including box changes), new pacemaker implantations, implantation due to AV block, implantation due to supraventricular conduction disturbances, and other implantations. Results The total number of total weekly implantations was reduced from 10.7 (weeks 6-11 / 2020) to 4.2 (weeks 12-17 / 2020; -60.1%, p = 0.02). We found no significant reduction in the same time frame in 2017-2019 (6.5 vs. 6.1 per week, p = 0.29). We found a similar effect in "new" pacemaker implantations (8.5 vs. 3.2 per week, -62.7%, p = 0.02) and AV block (5.0 vs. 1.5 per week, -70%, p = 0.03). There was no reduction in pacemaker implantation due to sick sinus syndrome (2.5 vs. 0.8 per week, -66.7%, p = 0.12) and other indications (1.0 vs. 0.8 per week, -16.7%, p = 0.86). In the six following weeks (18-23 / 2020), the total numbers (6.0 per week) and indications other than AV block rose to baseline (p > 0.05), but patients with AV block were still less prevalent (1.7 per week, p = 0.04). Conclusion The reduction of total and new pacemaker implantations during the COVID-19 lockdown was mainly based on a reduced pacemaker implantation rate for AV block. This effect persisted even after the national lockdown. This analysis implies that a significant number of patients with AV block may have avoided medical contact during and after the lockdown and therefore have experienced increased mortality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.