Capsule endoscopy is safe in patients with cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Bandorski ◽  
Harilaos Bogossian ◽  
Reinhard Hoeltgen
Keyword(s):  
Capsule Endoscopy ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators ◽  
Cardiac Pacemakers ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillators

scholarly journals Capsule Endoscopy in Patients with Cardiac Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: (Re)evaluation of the Current State in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland 2010

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Bandorski ◽  
Ralf Jakobs ◽  
Martin Brück ◽  
Reinhard Hoeltgen ◽  
Marcus Wieczorek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Capsule Endoscopy ◽  
Cardiac Pacemaker ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators ◽  
Cardiac Pacemakers ◽  
Current State ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Type Of Institution ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillators ◽  
Repeated Evaluation

Background and Aims. The study was a repeated evaluation of the experience of capsule endoscopy (CE) in patients with cardiac pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).Patients and Methods. A standardized questionnaire was sent by the manufactors Given Imaging and Olympus to all centers in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland providing capsule endoscopy service. The questionnaire covers the number of examined patients, monitoring during CE, check of the electric implants before and after CE, occurrence of arrhythmia, quality of CE video, complications, indication of CE, and type of institution.Results. Overall 580 questionnaires were sent to the users. 26/5% (Germany/Austria + Switzerland) of the questionnaires were sent back anonymously to the authors. 114 centers (82 hospitals, 11 surgeries, 21 without specification) replied. In 58 centers (51%), patients with cardiac pacemaker (n=300) and ICDs (n=80) underwent uneventful capsule endoscopy. The predominant indication (patients with CP 97%, patients with ICD 100%) was mid gastrointestinal bleeding.Conclusion. The results of our inquiry show that in spite of formal contraindication CE is increasingly applied in bleeding patients with cardiac pacemakers/ICDs and seems to be safe even in a large cohort.

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

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Bandorski ◽  
Martin Keuchel ◽  
Martin Brück ◽  
Reinhard Hoeltgen ◽  
Marcus Wieczorek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Capsule Endoscopy ◽  
In Vivo Studies ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators ◽  
Left Heart ◽  
Cardiac Pacemakers ◽  
Technical Data ◽  
Cardiac Devices ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillators

Background and Study Aims. Capsule endoscopy is an established tool for investigation of the small intestine. Because of limited clinical experience in patients with cardiac devices, the Food and Drug Administration and the manufacturer recommended not to use capsule endoscopy in these patients. The vast majority of investigations did not reveal any interference between capsule endoscopy and cardiac devices. Methods. Studies investigating interference between CE and cardiac devices were analysed. For the review we considered studies published in English or German and indexed in Medline, as well as highly relevant abstracts. Results. In vitro and in vivo studies mainly revealed no interference between capsule endoscopy and cardiac devices. Technical data of capsule endoscopy (Given Imaging) reveal that interference with cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillator is impossible. Telemetry can interfere with CE video. Conclusion. The clinical use of capsule endoscopy (Given Imaging) is unproblematic in patients with cardiac pacemakers.

Considerations in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices at End of Life

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 356-363
Author(s):  
Melanie T. Gura
Keyword(s):  
Terminal Illness ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators ◽  
Resynchronization Therapy ◽  
Cardiac Pacemakers ◽  
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices ◽  
Life Saving ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillators ◽  
Proactive Communication

Since the introduction of implantable cardiac pacemakers in 1958 and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in 1980, these devices have been proven to save and prolong lives. Pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy are deemed life-sustaining therapies. Despite these life-saving technologies, all patients ultimately will reach the end of their lives from either their heart disease or development of a terminal illness. Clinicians may be faced with patient and family requests to withdraw these life-sustaining therapies. The purpose of this article is to educate clinicians about the legal and ethical principles that underlie withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies such as device deactivation and to highlight the importance of proactive communication with patients and families in these situations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document