Capsule Endoscopy in Patients with Cardiac Pacemakers, Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators, and Left Heart Devices: A Review of the Current Literature

Bandorski, Dirk; Keuchel, Martin; Brück, Martin; Hoeltgen, Reinhard; Wieczorek, M; Jakobs, Ralf

doi:10.1155/2011/376053

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings are consistent with studies that show there is little to no effect on implantable cardiac devices due to any electromagnetic interference by the wireless capsule. There are studies which have cautioned that wireless telemetry may impair recording of images transmitted by the capsule . However, our study did not demonstrate any instances where this was the case.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 81%

“…The use of WCE for small bowel obscure or occult gastrointestinal bleeding has been increasing recently. Most capsule manufacturers list wireless capsules as a contraindication in patients with implantable cardiac devices because of possible interference between the electromagnetic signal transmitted by the capsule and the cardiac device itself . Our aim in this study was to investigate if patients with these devices, who had undergone a WCE procedure, had any adverse cardiac outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, WCE has becoming increasingly used in patients with cardiac devices such as pacemakers, internal cardiac defibrillators (ICD), and left‐ventricular assist devices (LVAD) . However, manufacturers have proposed a theoretical electromagnetic interference between the capsule and the cardiac device itself . The origins of this theory arose from observations in patients with implantable cardiac devices who underwent radiofrequency ablation and were noted to have device malfunction and failure during such an intervention .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Safety of wireless capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable cardiac devices

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aim Wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) has become an increasingly utilized imaging modality for the evaluation of gastrointestinal bleeding. There is a paucity of data evaluating the safety and use of WCE in patients with implantable cardiac devices. Methods A retrospective chart review of all patients who had a WCE at Loyola University Medical Center in Maywood, IL, USA completed between January 2007 and December 2016 identified patients with internal cardiac devices and obscure gastrointestinal bleeding. Patient WCE footage was viewed in its entirety before creating a final report to ensure no gaps in footage and video quality. Results No patient complaints were documented during the 8‐h procedure duration, and there were no cardiac abnormalities noted on telemetry. There were no device‐related complications documented in the 30‐day postprocedure time period. Postprocedure analysis of the WCE recordings demonstrated no interference in WCE image quality (loss of images or gaps in video) or duration. Conclusions There is no significant interference between WCE and implantable cardiac devices, and it appears to be safe to use.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Safety of wireless capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable cardiac devices

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dementia, gastroparesis, an esophageal stricture or swallowing disorders, those patients who are inoperable or refuse surgery, partial or intermittent small bowel obstruction, patients who have defibrillators or pacemakers and pregnant women [20,21].…”

Section: Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostics in Colorectal Surgery

Ferhatoğlu¹,

Kartal²

2018

Colorectal Cancer - Diagnosis, Screening and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite initial concerns, Capsule endoscopy also has not been found to interfere with these devices, nor does pacemaker affects imaging done with Capsule endoscopy [25,26] . Capsule endoscopy may be safely undertaken in patients with pacemakers and implanted defibrillators.…”

Section: Pearlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Myths, fallacies and practical pearls in GI lab

Kumar¹

2014

WJGE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many prevalent practices and guidelines related to Gastrointestinal endoscopy and procedural sedation are at odds with the widely available scientific-physiological and clinical outcome data. In many institutions, strict policy of pre-procedural extended fasting is still rigorously enforced, despite no evidence of increased incidence of aspiration after recent oral intake prior to sedation. Supplemental oxygen administration in the setting of GI procedural sedation has been increasingly adopted as reported in the medical journals, despite clear evidence that supplemental oxygen blunts the usefulness of pulse oximetry in timely detection of sedation induced hypoventilation, leading to increased number of adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes. Use of Propofol by Gastroenterologist-Nurse team is erroneously considered dangerous and often prohibited in various institutions, at the same time worldwide reports of remarkable safety and patient satisfaction continue to be published, dating back more than a decade. Of patient monitoring practices that have been advocated to be standard, many merely add cost, not value. Advances in the technology often are not incorporated in a timely manner in guidelines or clinical practices, e.g. , Capsule endoscopy or electrocautery during GI procedures do not interfere with proper functioning of the current pacemakers or defibrillators. Orthopedic surgeons have continued to recommend prophylactic antibiotics for joint replacement patients prior to GI procedures, without any evidence of need. These myths are explored for a succint review to prompt a change in clinical practices and institutional policies. Core tip: Many prevalent endoscopic procedural practices and policies are not only unsupported by clinical and scientific evidence, but are counterproductive. Rather than enhancing patient safety and comfort, these increase risk and expense, introduce unnecessary delays. Evidence to reach proper decisions about these topics has been available for a while, but is not appropriately acknowledged and implemented. Avoiding these pitfalls can have a significant positive impact because these policies cover routine events, actions and decisions, including: required prolonged pre-procedural fasting, routine supplemental oxygen during sedation, prohibition of Propofol use by nonanesthesia personnel, multiple monitoring practices and prophylactic recommendations.Kumar P. Myths, fallacies and practical pearls in GI lab. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 6(12): 584-591 Available from: URL:

show abstract

Capsule Endoscopy in Patients with Cardiac Pacemakers, Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators, and Left Heart Devices: A Review of the Current Literature

Cited by 24 publications

References 28 publications

Safety of wireless capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable cardiac devices

Safety of wireless capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable cardiac devices

Diagnostics in Colorectal Surgery

Myths, fallacies and practical pearls in GI lab

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About