ArticleCase reports in anesthesiology2026
Underrecognized Interaction Between PICO Dressings and Pacemakers: A Case From the ICU.
Article in Case reports in anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Underrecognized Interaction Between PICO Dressings and Pacemakers: A Case From the ICU.Case reports in anesthesiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Modern pacemakers incorporate a magnet-responsive switch that, on exposure to a sufficient static magnetic field, converts the device to fixed-rate asynchronous (magnet-mode) pacing. This is designed behaviour rather than malfunction. Interactions between this feature and magnet-containing medical equipment are underrecognised. The PICO 7 negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) system contains a magnet in its pump unit, which the manufacturer states can interfere with nearby pacemakers. Case Presentation: An 81-year-old man was admitted to the High Dependency Unit after right hemicolectomy. He had atrial fibrillation with a slow ventricular response and a permanent pacemaker programmed VVI at 60 beats per minute. Overnight, telemetry showed a sustained paced rate of 100 beats per minute; he was asymptomatic. The PICO 7 pump unit was found resting on his chest, over the pacemaker generator. Repositioning the pump to the foot of the bed returned the paced rate to 60 beats per minute immediately, and device interrogation the following day confirmed normal pacemaker function. Discussion: The fixed rate of 100 beats per minute, its dependence on pump position and immediate resolution on removal are characteristic of magnet-mode activation rather than generic electromagnetic interference. Although the patient was asymptomatic, a sustained rate of 100 beats per minute carried a risk of myocardial ischaemia and heart failure decompensation given his cardiac history. Recognition and a simple bedside intervention resolved the episode. Conclusion: Magnet-containing medical equipment placed near a cardiac implantable electronic device can trigger magnet-mode pacing. The risk depends on the position of the magnet-bearing component, not on the wound site. An unexplained change in a paced rate should prompt early consideration of a nearby magnetic source, because the remedy may be immediate and at the bedside.
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.