ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2016
Utilization and likelihood of radiologic diagnostic imaging in patients with implantable cardiac defibrillators.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03016429 (Safety and Clinical Outcomes of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electrical Devices), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Safety and Clinical Outcomes of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electrical Devices
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring the role of CT scouts in expediting MRI in acute stroke.Emergency radiology · 2025Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: the RESONANCE Spanish registry.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Awareness and barriers of sacral neuromodulation in women with overactive bladder.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- MR-Safe Cartesian Platform for Active Cardiac Shimming: Preliminary Validation.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2024Article
- Balanced-force shim system for correcting magnetic-field inhomogeneities in the heart due to implanted cardioverter defibrillators.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Reducing cardiac implantable electronic device-induced artefacts in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.European radiology · 2023Article
- Impact of wideband cardiac magnetic resonance on diagnosis, decision-making and outcomes in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2023Article
- Trends in Utilization of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Stroke Patients With Cardiac Rhythm Devices.The Neurohospitalist · 2022Article
- [Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac devices : Useful tool or just artifacts?]Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2022Review
- Evidence to support magnetic resonance conditional labelling of all pacemaker and defibrillator leads in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices.European heart journal · 2022Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging safety in patients with abandoned or functioning epicardial pacing leads.European radiology · 2022Article
- Feasibility, safety, and utility of brain MRI for patients with non-MRI-conditioned CIED.Neurosurgical review · 2020Article
- An operational approach to the execution of MR examinations in patients with CIED.La Radiologia medica · 2020Review
- Making MRI available for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: growing need and barriers to change.European radiology · 2020Review
- [Safe MRI examinations in patients with pacemakers and ICD].Der Radiologe · 2019Review
- Computed tomography continues to be the preferred tomographic imaging technology for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices despite a potential risk of electrical interference by irradiation.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019Article
- An eight-year prospective controlled study about the safety and diagnostic value of cardiac and non-cardiac 1.5-T MRI in patients with a conventional pacemaker or a conventional implantable cardioverter defibrillator.European radiology · 2018Article
- Increased healthcare utilization associated with complete atrioventricular block in pacemaker patients.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2018Article
- Safety of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Cardiac Devices.The New England journal of medicine · 2017Article
- Clinical Outcomes After Ablation of the AV Junction in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Impact of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo examine imaging utilization in a matched cohort of patients with and without implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) and to project magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) utilization over a 10-year period. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe Truven Health MarketScan Commercial claims and Medicare Supplemental health insurance claims data were used to identify patients with continuous health plan enrollment in 2009-2012. Patients with ICDs were identified using ICD-9 and CPT codes, and matched to patients with the same demographic and comorbidity profile, but no record of device implantation. Diagnostic imaging utilization was compared across the matched cohorts, in total, by imaging categories, and in subpopulations of stroke, back pain, and joint pain. MRI use in the nonimplant group over the 4-year period was extrapolated out to 10 years for ICD-indicated patients.
resultsA cohort of 18,770 matched patients were identified; average age 65.5 ± 13.38 and 21.9% female. ICD patients had significantly less MRI imaging (0.23 0.70 SD vs. 0.00 0.08 SD, P < 0.0001) than nonimplant patients. Among patients with records of stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) (ICD 5%, nonimplant 4%) and accompanying diagnostic imaging, 44% of nonimplant patients underwent MRI vs. 1% of ICD patients (P < 0.0001). Forecast models estimated that 53% to 64% of ICD-eligible patients may require an MRI within 10 years.
conclusionMRI utilization is lower in ICD patients compared to nonimplant patients, yet the burden of incident stroke/TIA, back, and joint pain suggests an unmet need for MR-conditional devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.