Interference in implanted cardiac devices, Part I.

作者: SERGIO L. PINSKI , RICHARD G. TROHMAN

DOI: 10.1046/J.1460-9592.2002.01367.X

关键词:

摘要: Sensing intrinsic cardiac electrical activity is essential for the function of pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). Examples undesired triggering or inhibition pacemaker output by extraneous signals were identified early after introduction noncompetitive, “ demand” pacemakers. Hermetic shielding in metal cases, filtering, interference rejection circuits, together with a preference (much more marked United States 1 than Europe 2 ) bipolar sensing, made contemporary ICDs relatively immune to electromagnetic energy sources homes workplaces. Sources (EMI) remained ubiquitous medical environment. However, they predictable avoidable. New technologies that use spectrum (i.e., wireless telephones, electronic article surveillance [EAS] devices) have rekindled interest EMI risks patients implanted devices. Although these do not constitute major public health threat, adverse interactions can occur. The counterpart compatibility, science aimed at avoiding potential adding redesigning circuits against specific sources. There are three elements any compatibility problem. must be an source, receptor victim (in our case device) cannot properly due phenomenon, path between them allows source interfere receptor. Each present, although may readily every situation. Identifying least two eliminating (or attenuating) one generally solves problems. Collaboration among industry, physicians, regulatory agencies, consumer groups will hopefully achieve full devices other technologies. This require adoption international standards establishing upper limit permissible field intensities whole spectrum. Implanted should react fields below this limit; intense prohibited. two-part review discusses first part addresses general concepts everyday life workplace. second focuses on EMI, highlighting preventive measures.

参考文章(71)
Hinberg I, Tan Ks, Can wireless communication systems affect implantable cardiac pacemakers? An in vitro laboratory study. Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology. ,vol. 32, pp. 18- 24 ,(1998)
Dennis A. Brumwell, Kai Kroll, Michael H. Lehmann, The Amplifier: Sensing the Depolarization Springer, Boston, MA. pp. 275- 302 ,(1996) , 10.1007/978-1-4615-6345-7_14
S. Serge Barold, Jacques Mugica, New perspectives in cardiac pacing ,(1990)
Antonis S. Manolis, Paul J. Wang, N. A. Mark Estes, Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators : a comprehensive textbook Dekker. ,(1994)
Dawn Tharr, C. Eugene Moss, Exposures to Electromagnetic Fields While Operating Walk-Through and Hand-Held Metal Detectors Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene. ,vol. 13, pp. 501- 504 ,(1998) , 10.1080/1047322X.1998.10390095
Adoración Jiménez, Antonio Hernández Madrid, José María González Rebollo, Andrés Sánchez, Javier Ortega, Fernando Lozano, Rafael Muñoz, Concepción Moro, Jesús Pascual, Eliseo Fernández, Interferencias electromagnéticas entre los desfibriladores automáticos y los teléfonos móviles digitales y analógicos Revista Española de Cardiología. ,vol. 51, pp. 375- 382 ,(1998) , 10.1016/S0300-8932(98)74761-X
GERALD C. KAYE, GHAZWAN S. BUTROUS, ALI ALLEN, STUART J. MELDRUM, JOHN G. MALE, A. JOHN CAMM, The effect of 50 Hz external electrical interference on implanted cardiac pacemakers. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. ,vol. 11, pp. 999- 1008 ,(1988) , 10.1111/J.1540-8159.1988.TB03944.X
CAREL C. DE COCK, HUGO J. SPRUIJT, LINDA M.C. VAN CAMPEN, ANDRIES W. PLU, CEES A. VISSER, Electromagnetic interference of an implantable loop recorder by commonly encountered electronic devices. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. ,vol. 23, pp. 1516- 1518 ,(2000) , 10.1046/J.1460-9592.2000.01516.X
PENELOPE S. ASTRIDGE, GERALD C. KAYE, SARAH WHITWORTH, PAUL KELLY, A. JOHN CAMM, E. JOHN PERRINS, The Response of Implanted Dual Chamber Pacemakers to 50 Hz Extraneous Electrical Interference Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. ,vol. 16, pp. 1966- 1974 ,(1993) , 10.1111/J.1540-8159.1993.TB00990.X