ReviewThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2017
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with magnetic resonance conditional pacemaker systems at 1.5 T: influence of pacemaker related artifacts on image quality including first pass perfusion, aortic and mitral valve assessment, flow measurement, short tau inversion recovery and T1-weighted imaging.
Review in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- SCMR expert consensus statement for cardiovascular magnetic resonance of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2024Guideline
- Applicability of Stress Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Devices: A Systematic Review.Cardiology research and practice · 2026Review
- Aortic velocity measurements derived from phase-contrast MRI are influenced by a cardiac implantable electronic device in both adult and pediatric human subjects.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional assessment of image distortion induced by active cardiac implants in 3.0T CMR.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Compact pediatric cardiac magnetic resonance imaging protocols.Pediatric radiology · 2023Review
- Reducing cardiac implantable electronic device-induced artefacts in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.European radiology · 2023Article
- Signal voids of active cardiac implants at 3.0 T CMR.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Feasibility of adenosine stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging in patients with MR-conditional transvenous permanent pacemakers and defibrillators.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2022Article
- Safety and image quality of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with retained epicardial pacing wires after heart transplantation.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2021Article
- Multimodality cardiac imaging in the 21st century: evolution, advances and future opportunities for innovation.The British journal of radiology · 2021Review
- Cardiac MRI-Update 2020.Der Radiologe · 2020Review
- Artefacts in 1.5 Tesla and 3 Tesla cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with leadless cardiac pacemakers.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are only limited data on the impact of device-related artifacts on image quality in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in patients with pacemakers (PM). Adenosine stress perfusion, T1-weighted imaging and flow measurement as well as valve characterization have not been evaluated previously concerning artifact burden. We aimed to assess image quality in all routinely used CMR sequences. We analyzed 2623 myocardial segments in CMR scans of 61 patients with MR conditional PM (mean age 72.1 ± 11.5 years), 23 (37.7%) with right sided, 38 (62.3%) with left-sided devices. There were no relevant artifacts in patients with right-sided devices irrespective of the imaging sequence. In left-sided implants no PM-induced artifacts were found in first pass perfusion sequence, flow analysis and T1 weighted imaging. Only few patients with left-sided devices showed significant PM-artifacts in aortic (3/38, 7.9%)/mitral (n = 2/38, 5.3%) valve imaging and STIR (n = 3/35, 8.6%). In STIR only 14/805 (1.7%) segments were involved. In left-sided PM SSFP cine sequences had more artifact burden than LGE with 377/1505 (25.0%) vs. 162/1505 (10.8%) myocardial segments involved by relevant artifacts respectively (p < 0.001). Apart from cine and LGE imaging in anterior myocardial segments with left-sided implants presence of MRI conditional pacemakers does not affect CMR image quality in multimodal CMR examinations to a significant extent. Our data supports evidence that reduced image quality does not need to be a major concern in PM patients undergoing CMR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27815793What 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.