Menu Close
  • Clinical
    • In the Literature
    • Key Clinical Questions
    • Interpreting Diagnostic Tests
    • Coding Corner
    • Clinical
    • Clinical Guidelines
    • COVID-19
    • POCUS
  • Practice Management
    • Quality
    • Public Policy
    • How We Did It
    • Key Operational Question
    • Technology
    • Practice Management
  • Diversity
  • Career
    • Leadership
    • Education
    • Movers and Shakers
    • Career
    • Learning Portal
    • The Hospital Leader Blog
  • Pediatrics
  • HM Voices
    • Commentary
    • In Your Eyes
    • In Your Words
    • The Flipside
  • SHM Resources
    • Society of Hospital Medicine
    • Journal of Hospital Medicine
    • SHM Career Center
    • SHM Converge
    • Join SHM
    • Converge Coverage
    • SIG Spotlight
    • Chapter Spotlight
    • #JHM Chat
  • Industry Content
    • Patient Monitoring with Tech
An Official Publication of
  • Clinical
    • In the Literature
    • Key Clinical Questions
    • Interpreting Diagnostic Tests
    • Coding Corner
    • Clinical
    • Clinical Guidelines
    • COVID-19
    • POCUS
  • Practice Management
    • Quality
    • Public Policy
    • How We Did It
    • Key Operational Question
    • Technology
    • Practice Management
  • Diversity
  • Career
    • Leadership
    • Education
    • Movers and Shakers
    • Career
    • Learning Portal
    • The Hospital Leader Blog
  • Pediatrics
  • HM Voices
    • Commentary
    • In Your Eyes
    • In Your Words
    • The Flipside
  • SHM Resources
    • Society of Hospital Medicine
    • Journal of Hospital Medicine
    • SHM Career Center
    • SHM Converge
    • Join SHM
    • Converge Coverage
    • SIG Spotlight
    • Chapter Spotlight
    • #JHM Chat
  • Industry Content
    • Patient Monitoring with Tech

Safety of MRI in patients with implantable cardiac devices

Clinical question: Is MRI safe for patients who have implanted ICD or pacemakers that have not been deemed to be “MRI conditional” by the Food and Drug Administration?

Background: The majority of patients with implantable cardiac devices have a clinical indication for MRI within 10 years. Devices that meet certain criteria specified by the Food and Drug Administration are not felt to pose any safety hazards and are deemed “MRI conditional.” Those that do not meet these criteria are referred to as “legacy” devices and are considered to be a contraindication to MRI by the FDA and device manufacturers. The majority of ICDs and pacemakers currently in use are legacy devices and access to MRI for patients who have these devices has been very limited. This study is the first large prospective study to evaluate the safety of an MRI protocol in patients with legacy ICDs and pacemakers.

Study design: Prospective nonrandomized study.

Setting: Single academic medical center.

Synopsis: During 2003-2015, 1,509 patients with ICDs (629 patients) and pacemakers (880 patients) were enrolled and underwent 2,103 MRI examinations supervised by either an electrophysiologist or a registered nurse with cardiac device programming experience.

Study outcomes included safety and device function immediately after MRI and change in device parameters both immediately after MRI and at long-term follow-up. The most important clinical adverse event that occurred was a reset of device to backup settings referred to as “power on reset” that occurred in nine examinations. Of these nine events, one was associated with mild physical discomfort, one led to device replacement, and one was associated with transient inhibition of pacing. Small changes in P- or R-wave amplitude and atrial or ventricular capture were noted at long-term follow-up. However, none of these were large enough to result in lead revision or device reprogramming. Notable limitations of this study include that it is a single-center study limiting its ability to be generalized and that nearly 20% of patients were lost to long term follow up.

Bottom line: When performed at an institution with an established safety protocol, MRI examinations in patients with legacy devices are not associated with clinically significant adverse safety events or changes in device function that require reprogramming. Multicenter studies are necessary to determine if these results can be generalizable.

Citation: Nazarian S et al. Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac devices. N Engl J Med. 2017 Dec 28;377(26):2555-64.

Dr. Scaletta is a hospitalist at Denver Health Medical Center and an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora.

  • 1

    Safety of MRI in patients with implantable cardiac devices

    May 29, 2018

  • 1

    Peer mentorship, groups help combat burnout in female physicians 

    May 29, 2018

  • Hospital safety program curbs surgical site infections

    May 25, 2018

  • 1

    Clinician denial of some patient requests decrease patient satisfaction

    May 25, 2018

  • 1

    Postop delirium management proposed as hospital performance measure

    May 25, 2018

  • 1

    MDR Candida auris is on the move

    May 24, 2018

  • 1

    LAAC in nonvalvular AF provides stroke protection comparable to warfarin

    May 24, 2018

  • 1

    No clear benefit of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation in the community after hospital discharge

    May 23, 2018

  • 1

    In-hospital mortality predictors eyed in pneumonia patient subset

    May 22, 2018

  • 1

    FDA approves Doptelet for liver disease patients undergoing procedures

    May 22, 2018

1 … 393 394 395 396 397 … 968
  • About The Hospitalist
  • Contact Us
  • The Editors
  • Editorial Board
  • Authors
  • Publishing Opportunities
  • Subscribe
  • Advertise
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-instagramfa-youtube-playfa-commentfa-envelopefa-rss
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.
    ISSN 1553-085X
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • SHM’s DE&I Statement
  • Cookie Preferences