Electromagnetic Interference in Biventricular and/or ICD Paced Patients

  • M. Santomauro
  • L. Ottaviano
  • D. Da Prato
  • A. Borrelli
  • M. Chiariello
Conference paper


The potential risk of interaction between electronic systems and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) is well documented and frequently reported on by the scientific press [1-4]. When an electronic medical device is exposed to radiofrequency (RF) signals by electronic systems, the RF energy (Table 1) is absorbed by the electronic circuitry and other components, and functioning may be altered. In a technologically advanced world, radiation from electronic system is omnipresent at home, work, and other everyday environments (Table 2). It is spread by different modes such as electrical leads or cables, electrostatic induction, electromagnetic radiation, intentional transmitters (radar, radio, TV and satellite transmissions, mobile telecommunication systems, scientific equipments), and unintentional transmitters (induction heaters, electrical equipment, car ignition systems, diathermy generators), and constitutes the main source of disturbances to active medical devices equipped with an electrical circuit prone to detect them.


Cellular Phone Electromagnetic Interference Time Division Multiple Access Universal Mobile Telecommunication System Radio Frequency Energy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Irnich W (1984) Interference in pacemakers. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 7:1021–1048PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P (1999) External electromagnetic interference with implantable cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators. MESPE J 1:128–133Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Tarricone L (1991) Evaluation of static magnetic field levels interfering with pacemakers. Physiol Med 7(2):73–76Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Toivonen L, Valjus J, Hongisto M, Mesto R (1991) The influence of elevated 50 Hz electric and magnetic fields on implanted cardiac pacemakers: the role of the lead configuration and programming of sensitivy. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 14:21142122Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Belott P, Sands S et al (1984) Resetting of DDD pacemakers due to EMI. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 7:169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hayes D (1992) EMI update. 9th Annual National Symposium on Pacing and Arrhythmia Control, FebruaryGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Telectronics Technical Note (1996) Electromagnetic Interference and the pacemaker patient: an updateGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Andrea D et al (1995) Do European GSM mobile cellular phones pose a potential risk to pacemaker patients? Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 18:12181224Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Naegeli B, Osswald S, Deola M, Burkart F (1996) Intermittent pacemaker disfunction caused by digital mobile phones. J Am Coll Cardiol 27:1471–1477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Bellocci F et al (1998) Electromagnetic interference of digital and analog cellular telephones with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: in vitro and vivo studies. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 22:626–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ehles C, Andresen D, Bruggemann T, Thormann L, Wehner H (1995) Functional pacemaker intereference by mobile telephones (abstract). Circulation 92[Suppl 1]:(1)738Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meisei E, Kopscek H, Klinghammer L, Daniel WG (1995) Intereference of mobile phones with function of implanted pacemakers - how significant is the risk? (abstract). Circulation 92 [Suppl 1]:(1)738Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hayes DL, Von Feldt LK, Neubauer SA, Christiansen JR, Rasmussen MI (1995) Effect of digital cellular phones on permanent pacemaker. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 18:863–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nowak B, Rosocha S, Zeuerhoff C et al (1996) Is there a risk for interactions between mobile phones and single-lead VDD pacemakers? (abstract). J Am Coll Cardiol 27 [Suppl A1:236AGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carillo R, Williams DB, Traad EA, Schor JS (1996) Electromagnetic filters impede adverse interference of pacemakers by digital telephones (abstract). J Am Coll Cardiol 27 [Suppl A]:15Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ellenbogen KH, Wood MH (1996) Chiamata urgente o numero sbagliato? J Am Coll Cardiol 27(6):1478–1479PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Donato A, Militiello C (1996) Interferenze tra telefoni cellulari e pacemaker. Stato dell’arte al 1995. Cardiostimolazione 14:10–19Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Donato A, Militello C, Santini F (1995) GSM and TACS cellular phones can alter pacemaker function. BEMS Abstract Book: Seventeeth Annual Meeting. Boston, Mass, 18–22 June pp 24–26Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Donato A, Militello C (1996) Electromagnetic interference of analog cellular telephones with pacemaker. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 19:1410–1418PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tofani S (1996) Stazioni radio base per la telefonia cellulare e sanità pubblica. AIRM - XIV Atti Congresso Nazionale Caserta, 1–3 1996 JulyGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carrillo R (1995) Preliminary observations on cellular telephones and pacemaker. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 18:863Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Santomauro M, Amendolara A, Costanzo A, Damiano M, Noverino P, Russo F, Amendolara M, Chiariello M (1997) Cellular phones and pacemakers: how do they interact? In: Raviele A (ed) Cardiac Arrhythmias 1997. Spinger-Verlag Italia, Milan, pp 514–521Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Santomauro M, D’Ascia C, Costanzo A, Ottaviano L, Cresta R, Donnici G, Chiariello M (2000) Interferenze elettromagnetiche nei portatori di device impiantabili: rischi potenziali o reali? Cardiologia 2000: 34° Convegno Internazionale, pp 410–414Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Santomauro M, D’Ascia C, Costanzo A, Ottaviano L, Cresta R, Donnici G, Chiariello M (2000) How risk mobile telephones for patients with pacemaker or ICD? Cardiac Arrhythmias: Cento 2000 Fifth International Symposium pp 58–63Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Donato A et al (1981) GSM cellular phones interferences with implantable pacemakers: in vitro observations. Proceedings of the V International Symposium on Biomedical Engineering, Santiago de Compostela, pp 275–276Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Donato A, Militello C (1996) Sistema Telepass: analisi dei rischi di interferenza elettromagnetica con pacemaker. Rome, Istituto Superiore di Sanità (Rapporti ISTISAN 96/42) p 56Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Donato A, Militello C, Polichetti A, Vecchia P (1996) Sistemi automatizzati per il controllo degli accessi: analisi dei rischi sanitari. Rome, Istituto Superiore di Sanità (Rapporti ISTISAN 96/2), p 52Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mclvor ME (1995) Environmental electromagnetic interference from electronic article surveillance devices. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 18:2229–2230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Barbaro V, Bartolini P, Battisti S et al (1991) Esposizione al campo elettromagnetico e corretto funzionamento dei pacemaker: il caso del treno ad alta velocità ETR450. 54° Congresso Nazionale della Società Italiana di Medicina del Lavoro e Igiene Industriale. L’Aquila, 9–12 October 1991, pp 1147–1150Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bartolini P (1994) Interazione dei campi elettromagnetici prodotti da una risonanza magnetica con protesi e materiali ferromagnetici. Ann Ist Super Sanità 30:51–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gimbel JR, Johnson D et al (1996) Sicurezza d’impiego della tecnica di imaging con risonanza magnetica in cinque pazienti con pacemaker cardiaci permanenti. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 19:913–919PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dodinot B, Godenir J et al (1993) Electronic article surveillance: a possible danger for pacemaker patients. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 16:46–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lévy S, FESC (1999) ESC Statement on possible interference between electronic article surveillance system & implanted pacemakers or defibrillators. Newsletter, vol 8, no 2.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mugica J, Henry L, Podeur H (2000) Study of interactions between permanent pacemakers and electronic antitheft surveillance systems. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 23(3):333–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Groh WI, Boschee SA, Engelstein ED (1999) Interaction between electronic article surveillance systems and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Circulation 100:387392Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    McIvor ME, Reddinger J, Floden E (1998) Study of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator triggering by electronic article surveillance devices. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 21:1847–1861PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Santomauro
    • 1
  • L. Ottaviano
    • 1
  • D. Da Prato
    • 1
  • A. Borrelli
    • 1
  • M. Chiariello
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of CardiologyUniversity Federico IINaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations