Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36117853›Full record

ArticleCurrent cardiovascular imaging reports2019

MRI of Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.

Jessica A Martinez, Daniel B Ennis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current cardiovascular imaging reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. 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 · 2024
    Guideline
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jessica A MartinezDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Daniel B EnnisDepartment of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Funding

Are 3T MRI Exams Safe For Patients with Pacemakers and ICDs?R21HL127433 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI ENNIS, DANIEL B · 2015 to 2016
$424k
NHLBI NIH HHS R21 HL127433
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review is to clarify the risks associated with MRI exams for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and to provide information regarding the MRI examination protocol for patients with CIEDs. Recent Findings: Several prospective studies evaluated the feasibility of MRI exams for patients with CIEDs and reported no adverse events. These studies suggest that by following a specific MRI examination protocol and monitoring both CIED parameters and the patient's symptoms, an MRI exam can be performed by appropriately trained personnel with an acceptable benefit-to-risk ratio. Summary: Both MR unsafe and MR conditional CIEDs are commercially available, but there are no MR safe CIEDs. The potential risks faced by patients with CIEDs during an MRI exam are always present and warrant careful monitoring. Three magnetic fields in the MRI scanner interact with the device in ways that can damage the CIED or harm the patient. Due to safety concerns and out of an abundance of caution, the majority of MRI exams for patients with CIEDs are currently denied. However, when following a specific MRI exam protocol, these risks can be mitigated.

Indexed as

Cardiac implantable medical devicesICDMagnetic resonance imagingMRI protocolMRI safetyPacemaker

Identifiers

PMID36117853
PMCPMC9477432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.