Background-The purpose of the present study was to evaluate a strategy for safe performance of extrathoracic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in non-pacemaker-dependent patients with cardiac pacemakers. Methods and Results-Inclusion criteria were presence of a cardiac pacemaker and urgent clinical need for an MRI examination. Pacemaker-dependent patients and those requiring examinations of the thoracic region were excluded. The study group consisted of 82 pacemaker patients who underwent a total of 115 MRI examinations at 1.5T. To minimize radiofrequency-related lead heating, the specific absorption rate was limited to 1.5 W/kg. All pacemakers were reprogrammed before MRI: If heart rate was Ͻ60 bpm, the asynchronous mode was programmed to avoid magnetic resonance (MR)-induced inhibition; if heart rate was Ͼ60 bpm, sense-only mode was used to avoid MR-induced competitive pacing and potential proarrhythmia. Patients were monitored with ECG and pulse oximetry. All pacemakers were interrogated immediately before and after the MRI examination and after 3 months, including measurement of pacing capture threshold (PCT) and serum troponin I levels. All MR examinations were completed safely. Inhibition of pacemaker output or induction of arrhythmias was not observed. PCT increased significantly from pre-to post-MRI (Pϭ0.017). In 2 of 195 leads, an increase in PCT was only detected at follow-up. In 4 of 114 examinations, troponin increased from a normal baseline value to above normal after MRI, and in 1 case (troponin pre-MRI 0.02 ng/mL, post-MRI 0.16 ng/mL), this increase was associated with a significant increase in PCT. Conclusions-Extrathoracic MRI of non-pacemaker-dependent patients can be performed with an acceptable risk-benefit ratio under controlled conditions and by taking both MR-and pacemaker-related precautions.

Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has unparalleled soft-tissue imaging capabilities. The presence of devices such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), however, was historically considered a contraindication to MR imaging. We summarize the potential hazards of the device-MR environment interaction, and present updated information regarding in vitro and in vivo experiments suggesting that certain pacemaker and ICD systems may indeed be MR-safe. Recent reports on several hundred patients with implantable pacemakers and ICDs who underwent MR scan safely indicate that, under certain conditions, individuals with these implanted systems may benefit from MR imaging. We believe that, on a case-by-case basis, the diagnostic benefit from MR imaging outweighs the presumed risks for some pacemaker and ICD patients. Thus for some patients, the risks presented by MR imaging under specific, characterized scanning and monitoring conditions may be acceptable given the diagnostic benefit of this powerful imaging modality. This may have major clinical implications on current imaging practice. A strategy for the performance of MR imaging in these individuals is proposed.

MR imaging at 0.5 T can be safely performed in patients with implanted pacemakers in carefully selected clinical circumstances when appropriate strategies (programming to an asynchronous mode, adequate monitoring techniques, limited RF exposure) are used.