Experimental Study on Malfunction of Pacemakers Due to Exposure to Different External Magnetic Fields

Overview

Journal J Interv Card Electrophysiol

Publisher Springer

Date 2012 Jan 11

PMID 22231158

Citations 5

Authors

Maria Tiikkaja

Tommi Alanko

Harri Lindholm

Maila Hietanen

Juha Hartikainen

Lauri Toivonen

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Cardiac pacemaker malfunction due to exposure to magnetic fields may cause serious problems in some work environments for workers having cardiac pacemakers. The aim of this study was to find the magnetic field interference thresholds for several commonly used pacemaker models.

Methods: We investigated 16 pacemakers from three different manufacturers with the frequency range of 2 to 1,000 Hz, using sinusoidal, pulse, ramp, and square waveforms. The magnetic fields were produced by a computer-controlled Helmholtz coil system.

Results: Pacemaker malfunction occurred in six of 16 pacemakers. Interaction developed almost immediately after high-intensity magnetic field exposure started. With each waveform, at least two pacemakers exhibited interference. In most exposure settings, there was no interference at magnetic field levels below the international occupational safety limits. Nevertheless, some frequencies using ramp or square waveforms interfered with pacemakers even at levels below public exposure limits. The occurrence of interference depended greatly on the waveform, frequency, magnetic field intensity, and the sensing configuration of the pacemaker. Unipolar configurations were more susceptible for interference than the bipolar ones. In addition, magnetic fields perpendicular to the pacemaker loops were more likely to cause interference than parallel fields.

Conclusion: There is a need for further investigations on pacemaker interference caused by different external magnetic fields to ensure safe working environment to workers with a pacemaker.

Citing Articles

Wearable Magnetic Field Sensor with Low Detection Limit and Wide Operation Range for Electronic Skin Applications.

Li S, Wu Y, Asghar W, Li F, Zhang Y, He Z Adv Sci (Weinh). 2023; 11(37):e2304525.

PMID: 38037314 PMC: 11462294. DOI: 10.1002/advs.202304525.

Is air travel safe for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices?.

Erkan A Anatol J Cardiol. 2021; 25(Suppl 1):26-28.

PMID: 34464297 PMC: 8412049. DOI: 10.5152/AnatolJCardiol.2021.S110.

Electromagnetic interference in cardiac electronic implants caused by novel electrical appliances emitting electromagnetic fields in the intermediate frequency range: a systematic review.

Driessen S, Napp A, Schmiedchen K, Kraus T, Stunder D Europace. 2018; 21(2):219-229.

PMID: 29992289 PMC: 6365808. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euy155.

Personal medical electronic devices and walk-through metal detector security systems: assessing electromagnetic interference effects.

Guag J, Addissie B, Witters D Biomed Eng Online. 2017; 16(1):33.

PMID: 28320451 PMC: 5359895. DOI: 10.1186/s12938-017-0328-9.

Assessment of Electromagnetic Interference with Active Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) Caused by the Qi A13 Design Wireless Charging Board.

Seckler T, Jagielski K, Stunder D Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015; 12(6):5886-904.

PMID: 26024360 PMC: 4483677. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120605886.

References

Altamura G, Toscano S, GENTILUCCI G, Ammirati F, Castro A, Pandozi C . Influence of digital and analogue cellular telephones on implanted pacemakers. Eur Heart J. 1997; 18(10):1632-41. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a015144. View

Scholten A, Silny J . The interference threshold of unipolar cardiac pacemakers in extremely low frequency magnetic fields. J Med Eng Technol. 2001; 25(5):185-94. DOI: 10.1080/03091900110066419. View

Frank R, Souques M, Himbert C, Hidden-Lucet F, Petitot J, Fontaine G . [Effects of 50 to 60 Hz and of 20 to 50 kHz magnetic fields on the operation of implanted cardiac pacemakers]. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 2003; 96 Spec No 3:35-41. View

Wilke A, Kruse T, HESSE H, Funck R, Maisch B . Interactions between pacemakers and security systems. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1998; 21(9):1784-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1998.tb00279.x. View

Gimbel J, Cox Jr J . Electronic article surveillance systems and interactions with implantable cardiac devices: risk of adverse interactions in public and commercial spaces. Mayo Clin Proc. 2007; 82(3):318-22. DOI: 10.4065/82.3.318. View

Irnich W, Bernstein A . Do induction cooktops interfere with cardiac pacemakers?. Europace. 2006; 8(5):377-84. DOI: 10.1093/europace/eul014. View

Bernstein A, Daubert J, Fletcher R, Hayes D, Luderitz B, Reynolds D . The revised NASPE/BPEG generic code for antibradycardia, adaptive-rate, and multisite pacing. North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology/British Pacing and Electrophysiology Group. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2002; 25(2):260-4. DOI: 10.1046/j.1460-9592.2002.00260.x. View

Hedjiedj A, Goeury C, Nadi M . A methodological approach for the characterization of cardiac pacemaker immunity to low frequency interferences: case of 50 Hz, 60 Hz, 10 kHz and 25 kHz led disruptions. J Med Eng Technol. 2002; 26(5):223-7. DOI: 10.1080/03091900210156896. View

Elshershari H, Celiker A, Ozer S, Ozme S . Influence of D-net (EUROPEAN GSM-standard) cellular telephones on implanted pacemakers in children. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2002; 25(9):1328-30. DOI: 10.1046/j.1460-9592.2002.01328.x. View

10.

Bassen H . Low frequency magnetic emissions and resulting induced voltages in a pacemaker by iPod portable music players. Biomed Eng Online. 2008; 7:7. PMC: 2265271. DOI: 10.1186/1475-925X-7-7. View

11.

Hirose M, Hida M, Sato E, Kokubo K, Nie M, Kobayashi H . Electromagnetic interference of implantable unipolar cardiac pacemakers by an induction oven. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2005; 28(6):540-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2005.09565.x. View

12.

Trigano A, Blandeau O, Dale C, Wong M, Wiart J . Reliability of electromagnetic filters of cardiac pacemakers tested by cellular telephone ringing. Heart Rhythm. 2005; 2(8):837-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2005.03.011. View

13.

Mugica J, Henry L, Podeur H . Study of interactions between permanent pacemakers and electronic antitheft surveillance systems. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2000; 23(3):333-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2000.tb06758.x. View

14.

Thaker J, Patel M, Jongnarangsin K, Liepa V, Thakur R . Electromagnetic interference with pacemakers caused by portable media players. Heart Rhythm. 2008; 5(4):538-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2008.01.028. View

15.

Tandogan I, Temizhan A, Yetkin E, Guray Y, Ileri M, Duru E . The effects of mobile phones on pacemaker function. Int J Cardiol. 2005; 103(1):51-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2004.08.031. View

16.

Kolb C, Schmieder S, Lehmann G, Zrenner B, Karch M, Plewan A . Do airport metal detectors interfere with implantable pacemakers or cardioverter-defibrillators?. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 41(11):2054-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0735-1097(03)00424-8. View

17.

. Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz). International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Health Phys. 1998; 74(4):494-522. View

18.

. Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric and magnetic fields (1 Hz to 100 kHz). Health Phys. 2010; 99(6):818-36. DOI: 10.1097/HP.0b013e3181f06c86. View

19.

Chiara G, Primiani V, Moglie F . Experimental and numeric investigation about electromagnetic interference between implantable cardiac pacemaker and magnetic fields at power line frequency. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 2007; 43(3):248-53. View

20.

Chiu C, Huh J, De Souza L, Alfaro-Ramirez A, Clegg R, Fenwick L . A prospective pediatric clinical trial of digital music players: do they interfere with pacemakers?. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2008; 20(1):44-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2008.01270.x. View