Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices and abandoned or epicardial leads: a systematic review and meta-analysis

EP Europace Journal

26 June 2024
Organised by: Logo
ESC Journals IMAGING Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR)

Abstract

AbstractAims

Persistent reluctance to perform magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with abandoned and/or epicardial leads of cardiac implantable electronic devices is related to in vitro studies reporting tip heating. While there is a plethora of data on the safety of MRI in conditional and non-conditional implantable devices, there is a clear lack of safety data in patients with abandoned and/or epicardial leads.

Methods and results

Relevant literature was identified in Medline and CINAHL using the key terms ‘magnetic resonance imaging’ AND ‘abandoned leads’ OR ‘epicardial leads’. Secondary literature and cross-references were supplemented. For reporting guidance, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 was used. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number 465530. Twenty-one publications with a total of 656 patients with 854 abandoned and/or epicardial leads and 929 MRI scans of different anatomical regions were included. No scan-related major adverse cardiac event was documented, although the possibility of under-reporting of critical events in the literature should be considered. Furthermore, no severe device dysfunction or severe arrhythmia was reported. Mainly transient lead parameter changes were observed in 2.8% in the subgroup of patients with functional epicardial leads. As a possible correlate of myocardial affection, subjective sensations occurred mainly in the subgroup with abandoned epicardial leads (4.0%), but no change in myocardial biomarkers was observed.

Conclusion

Existing publications did not report any relevant adverse events for MRI in patients with abandoned and/or epicardial leads if performed according to strict safety guidelines. However, a more rigorous risk–benefit calculation should be made for patients with epicardial leads.

Contributors

Stephan Gielen
Stephan Gielen

Author

Hospital Lippe-Detmold Detmold , Germany

ESC 365 is supported by