Worldwide, more than 60 million MRI scans are performed annually, but imaging for the millions of patients who have cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), such as pacemakers, is logistically challenging due to worries about how the magnetic field would impact the implants.
Strong magnetic fields and radio waves are used in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a form of scan, to provide precise images of the inside of the body. A huge tube with strong magnets is an MRI scanner.
Now, a recently released study from the University of Missouri School of Medicine shows that these devices may be safely and successfully reprogrammed, even from a distance.
209 patients at the University Hospital of MU Health Care who had their devices remotely programmed for MRI using Medtronic RM CareLink technology were the subjects of an observational research. 51 of those scans were done immediately.
A thorough, cross-sectional image of interior organs and structures can be produced by an MRI scan using a powerful magnet, radio waves, and a computer. The scanner itself usually looks like a sizable tube with a table in the center onto which the patient can be slid.
A programming wand was placed on the patient’s CIED at the beginning of each MRI session by the MRI technician. This allowed the off-site operator to access the patient’s CIED remotely and switch it to an MRI-safe mode.
During this study, none of the patients experienced any symptoms during the scan, no one needed any changes to the baseline settings afterward, and there were no technology issues. The estimated time saved per scan was 18 to 38 minutes per patient, calculated by measuring the device representative’s travel time to the MRI suite.
Sandeep Gautam
The remote programmer reset the device to the patient’s default settings after the scan was finished. Unlike CT scans and X-rays, MRI scans do not involve the use of potentially dangerous ionizing radiation.
“During this study, none of the patients experienced any symptoms during the scan, no one needed any changes to the baseline settings afterward, and there were no technology issues,” said senior author Sandeep Gautam, MD, associate professor of clinical medicine.
“The estimated time saved per scan was 18 to 38 minutes per patient, calculated by measuring the device representative’s travel time to the MRI suite.”
If there is no device representative or other certified staff on-site to conduct the task, scheduling MRI scans and other procedures that need device programming may not need to be changed.
“We believe this technology will reduce unnecessary use of health care resources and manpower,” Gautam said. “This will eventually lead to a reduction in health care costs, as it will require a smaller number of personnel for device programming, eliminate travel cost and may be especially helpful in rural areas where access to health care is limited.”
Future research, according to Gautam, is required to assess the security and effectiveness of remote programming across a wider range of contexts, vendors, and patient populations.
Gautam’s co-authors include principal investigator Sisir Siddamsetti, MD, cardiology fellow; and Alexander Shinn, DO, medical resident.
