Digestive Diseases and Sciences

, Volume 57, Issue 6, pp 1719–1723 | Cite as

Safety of Capsule Endoscopy Using Human Body Communication in Patients with Cardiac Devices

  • Joo Won Chung
  • Hye Jin Hwang
  • Moon Jae Chung
  • Jeong Youp Park
  • Hui-Nam Pak
  • Si Young Song
Brief Communication



The MiroCam (IntroMedic, Ltd., Seoul, Korea) is a small-bowel capsule endoscope that uses human body communication to transmit data. The potential interactions between cardiac devices and the capsule endoscope are causes for concern, but no data are available for this matter.


This clinical study was designed to evaluate the potential influence of the MiroCam capsules on cardiac devices.


Patients with cardiac pacemakers or implantable cardiac defibrillators referred for evaluation of small bowel disease were prospectively enrolled in this study. Before capsule endoscopy, a cardiologist checked baseline electrocardiograms and functions of the cardiac devices. Cardiac rhythms were continuously monitored by 24-h telemetry during capsule endoscopy in the hospital. After completion of procedures, functions of the cardiac devices were checked again for interference. Images from the capsule endoscopy were reviewed and analyzed for technical problems.


Six patients, three with pacemakers and three with implantable cardiac defibrillators, were included in the study. We identified no disturbances in the cardiac devices and no arrhythmias detected on telemetry monitoring during capsule endoscopy. No significant changes in the programmed parameters of the cardiac devices were noted after capsule endoscopy. There were no imaging disturbances from the cardiac devices on capsule endoscopy.


Capsule endoscopy using human body communication to transmit data was safely performed in patients with cardiac pacemakers or implantable cardiac defibrillators. Images from the capsule endoscopy were not affected by cardiac devices. A further large-scale study is required to confirm the safety of capsule endoscopy with various types of cardiac devices.


Capsule endoscopy Human body communication Cardiac pacemaker Implantable cardiac defibrillator 


Conflict of interest

None of the authors has any conflicts of interest to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Saurin JC. Capsule endoscopy. Endoscopy. 2007;39:986–991. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-966925.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schnoll-Sussman F, Kulkarni K. Risks of capsule endoscopy. Tech Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;10:25–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Storch I, Barkin JS. Contraindications to capsule endoscopy: do any still exist? Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2006;16:329–336. doi: 10.1016/j.giec.2006.01.017.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yerra L, Reddy PC. Effects of electromagnetic interference on implanted cardiac devices and their management. Cardiol Rev. 2007;15:304–309. doi: 10.1097/CRD.0b013e31813e0ba9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sweesy MW, Holland JL, Smith KW. Electromagnetic interference in cardiac rhythm management devices. AACN Clin Issues. 2004;15:391–403.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Santucci PA, Haw J, Trohman RG, et al. Interference with an implantable defibrillator by an electronic antitheft-surveillance device. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1371–1374. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199811053391905.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Martin ET, Coman JA, Shellock FG, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and cardiac pacemaker safety at 1.5-Tesla. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(7):1315–1324. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2003.12.016.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hayes DL, Wang PJ, Reynolds DW, et al. Interference with cardiac pacemakers by cellular telephones. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1473–1479. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199705223362101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Irnich W, Batz L, Muller R, et al. Electromagnetic interference of pacemakers by mobile phones. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1996;19:1431–1446.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thaker JP, Patel MB, Jongnarangsin K, et al. Electromagnetic interference with pacemakers caused by portable media players. Heart Rhythm. 2008;5:538–544. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2008.01.028.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tandogan I, Temizhan A, Yetkin E, et al. The effects of mobile phones on pacemaker function. Int J Cardiol. 2005;103:51–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leighton JA, Sharma VK, Srivathsan K, et al. Safety of capsule endoscopy in patients with pacemakers. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;59:567–569.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leighton JA, Srivathsan K, Carey EJ, et al. Safety of wireless capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable cardiac defibrillators. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:1728–1731. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.41391.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bandorski D, Diehl KL, Jaspersen D. Capsule endoscopy in patients with cardiac pacemakers: current situation in Germany. Z Gastroenterol. 2005;43:715–718. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-858469.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bandorski D, Lotterer E, Hartmann D, et al. Capsule endoscopy in patients with cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators—a retrospective multicenter investigation. J Gastrointest Liver Dis. 2011;20:33–37.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Payeras G, Piqueras J, Moreno VJ, et al. Effects of capsule endoscopy on cardiac pacemakers. Endoscopy. 2005;37:1181–1185. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-870558.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dubner S, Dubner Y, Rubio H, et al. Electromagnetic interference from wireless video-capsule endoscopy on implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2007;30:472–475. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2007.00695.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bandorski D, Irnich W, Bruck M, et al. Capsule endoscopy and cardiac pacemakers: investigation for possible interference. Endoscopy. 2008;40:36–39. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-995353.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bandorski D, Irnich W, Bruck M, et al. Do endoscopy capsules interfere with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators? Endoscopy. 2009;41:457–461. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1214610.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bang S, Park JY, Jeong S, et al. First clinical trial of the “MiRo” capsule endoscope by using a novel transmission technology: electric-field propagation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:253–259. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.04.033.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim TS Park J, Moon SW, et al. Method and apparatus for communication between inside and outside of transmission medium using transmission medium as communication line. US patent US 7,307,544 B2. December 11, 2007.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dirks MH, Costea F, Seidman EG. Successful videocapsule endoscopy in patients with an abdominal cardiac pacemaker. Endoscopy. 2008;40:73–75. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-966785.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dubner S, Dubner Y, Gallino S, et al. Electromagnetic interference with implantable cardiac pacemakers by video capsule. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61:250–254.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Naegeli B, Osswald S, Deola M, et al. Intermittent pacemaker dysfunction caused by digital mobile telephones. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27:1471–1477.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joo Won Chung
    • 1
  • Hye Jin Hwang
    • 2
  • Moon Jae Chung
    • 1
  • Jeong Youp Park
    • 1
  • Hui-Nam Pak
    • 2
  • Si Young Song
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal MedicineYonsei Institute of Gastroenterology, Yonsei University College of MedicineSeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Division of CardiologyYonsei Cardiovascular Center and Cardiovascular Research Institute, Yonsei College of MedicineSeoulRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Brain Korea 21 Project for Medical ScienceSeoulRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Severance Biomedical Science Institute, Yonsei University College of MedicineSeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations