Capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable electromedical devices is safe

Lucinda A. Harris, Stephanie L. Hansel, Elizabeth Rajan, Komandoor Srivathsan, Robert Rea, Michael D. Crowell, David E. Fleischer, Shabana F Pasha, Suryakanth R. Gurudu, Russell I. Heigh, Arthur D. Shiff, Janice K. Post, Jonathan A Leighton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Study Aims. The presence of an implantable electromechanical cardiac device (IED) has long been considered a relative contraindication to the performance of video capsule endoscopy (CE). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of CE in patients with IEDs. A secondary purpose was to determine whether IEDs have any impact on images captured by CE. Patients and Methods. A retrospective chart review of all patients who had a capsule endoscopy at Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, AZ, USA, or Rochester, MN, USA, (January 2002 to June 2010) was performed to identify CE studies done on patients with IEDs. One hundred and eighteen capsule studies performed in 108 patients with IEDs were identified and reviewed for demographic data, method of preparation, and study data. Results. The most common indications for CE were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (77%), anemia (14%), abdominal pain (5%), celiac disease (2%), diarrhea (1%), and Crohn's disease (1%). Postprocedure assessments did not reveal any detectable alteration on the function of the IED. One patient with an ICD had a 25-minute loss of capsule imaging due to recorder defect. Two patients with LVADs had interference with capsule image acquisition. Conclusions. CE did not interfere with IED function, including PM, ICD, and/or LVAD and thus appears safe. Additionally, PM and ICD do not appear to interfere with image acquisition but LVAD may interfere with capsule images and require that capsule leads be positioned as far away as possible from the IED to assure reliable image acquisition.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number959234
JournalGastroenterology Research and Practice
Volume2013
DOIs
StatePublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Capsule Endoscopy
Capsules
Equipment and Supplies
Celiac Disease
Crohn Disease
Abdominal Pain
Anemia
Diarrhea
Demography
Hemorrhage
Safety

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology
  • Hepatology

Cite this

Capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable electromedical devices is safe. / Harris, Lucinda A.; Hansel, Stephanie L.; Rajan, Elizabeth; Srivathsan, Komandoor; Rea, Robert; Crowell, Michael D.; Fleischer, David E.; Pasha, Shabana F; Gurudu, Suryakanth R.; Heigh, Russell I.; Shiff, Arthur D.; Post, Janice K.; Leighton, Jonathan A.

In: Gastroenterology Research and Practice, Vol. 2013, 959234, 2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harris, LA, Hansel, SL, Rajan, E, Srivathsan, K, Rea, R, Crowell, MD, Fleischer, DE, Pasha, SF, Gurudu, SR, Heigh, RI, Shiff, AD, Post, JK & Leighton, JA 2013, 'Capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable electromedical devices is safe', Gastroenterology Research and Practice, vol. 2013, 959234. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/959234
Harris, Lucinda A. ; Hansel, Stephanie L. ; Rajan, Elizabeth ; Srivathsan, Komandoor ; Rea, Robert ; Crowell, Michael D. ; Fleischer, David E. ; Pasha, Shabana F ; Gurudu, Suryakanth R. ; Heigh, Russell I. ; Shiff, Arthur D. ; Post, Janice K. ; Leighton, Jonathan A. / Capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable electromedical devices is safe. In: Gastroenterology Research and Practice. 2013 ; Vol. 2013.
@article{fc06429082614c4e8cdf6b0544dd4b0e,
title = "Capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable electromedical devices is safe",
abstract = "Background and Study Aims. The presence of an implantable electromechanical cardiac device (IED) has long been considered a relative contraindication to the performance of video capsule endoscopy (CE). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of CE in patients with IEDs. A secondary purpose was to determine whether IEDs have any impact on images captured by CE. Patients and Methods. A retrospective chart review of all patients who had a capsule endoscopy at Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, AZ, USA, or Rochester, MN, USA, (January 2002 to June 2010) was performed to identify CE studies done on patients with IEDs. One hundred and eighteen capsule studies performed in 108 patients with IEDs were identified and reviewed for demographic data, method of preparation, and study data. Results. The most common indications for CE were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (77{\%}), anemia (14{\%}), abdominal pain (5{\%}), celiac disease (2{\%}), diarrhea (1{\%}), and Crohn's disease (1{\%}). Postprocedure assessments did not reveal any detectable alteration on the function of the IED. One patient with an ICD had a 25-minute loss of capsule imaging due to recorder defect. Two patients with LVADs had interference with capsule image acquisition. Conclusions. CE did not interfere with IED function, including PM, ICD, and/or LVAD and thus appears safe. Additionally, PM and ICD do not appear to interfere with image acquisition but LVAD may interfere with capsule images and require that capsule leads be positioned as far away as possible from the IED to assure reliable image acquisition.",
author = "Harris, {Lucinda A.} and Hansel, {Stephanie L.} and Elizabeth Rajan and Komandoor Srivathsan and Robert Rea and Crowell, {Michael D.} and Fleischer, {David E.} and Pasha, {Shabana F} and Gurudu, {Suryakanth R.} and Heigh, {Russell I.} and Shiff, {Arthur D.} and Post, {Janice K.} and Leighton, {Jonathan A}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1155/2013/959234",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2013",
journal = "Gastroenterology Research and Practice",
issn = "1687-6121",
publisher = "Hindawi Publishing Corporation",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Capsule endoscopy in patients with implantable electromedical devices is safe

AU - Harris, Lucinda A.

AU - Hansel, Stephanie L.

AU - Rajan, Elizabeth

AU - Srivathsan, Komandoor

AU - Rea, Robert

AU - Crowell, Michael D.

AU - Fleischer, David E.

AU - Pasha, Shabana F

AU - Gurudu, Suryakanth R.

AU - Heigh, Russell I.

AU - Shiff, Arthur D.

AU - Post, Janice K.

AU - Leighton, Jonathan A

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Background and Study Aims. The presence of an implantable electromechanical cardiac device (IED) has long been considered a relative contraindication to the performance of video capsule endoscopy (CE). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of CE in patients with IEDs. A secondary purpose was to determine whether IEDs have any impact on images captured by CE. Patients and Methods. A retrospective chart review of all patients who had a capsule endoscopy at Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, AZ, USA, or Rochester, MN, USA, (January 2002 to June 2010) was performed to identify CE studies done on patients with IEDs. One hundred and eighteen capsule studies performed in 108 patients with IEDs were identified and reviewed for demographic data, method of preparation, and study data. Results. The most common indications for CE were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (77%), anemia (14%), abdominal pain (5%), celiac disease (2%), diarrhea (1%), and Crohn's disease (1%). Postprocedure assessments did not reveal any detectable alteration on the function of the IED. One patient with an ICD had a 25-minute loss of capsule imaging due to recorder defect. Two patients with LVADs had interference with capsule image acquisition. Conclusions. CE did not interfere with IED function, including PM, ICD, and/or LVAD and thus appears safe. Additionally, PM and ICD do not appear to interfere with image acquisition but LVAD may interfere with capsule images and require that capsule leads be positioned as far away as possible from the IED to assure reliable image acquisition.

AB - Background and Study Aims. The presence of an implantable electromechanical cardiac device (IED) has long been considered a relative contraindication to the performance of video capsule endoscopy (CE). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of CE in patients with IEDs. A secondary purpose was to determine whether IEDs have any impact on images captured by CE. Patients and Methods. A retrospective chart review of all patients who had a capsule endoscopy at Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, AZ, USA, or Rochester, MN, USA, (January 2002 to June 2010) was performed to identify CE studies done on patients with IEDs. One hundred and eighteen capsule studies performed in 108 patients with IEDs were identified and reviewed for demographic data, method of preparation, and study data. Results. The most common indications for CE were obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (77%), anemia (14%), abdominal pain (5%), celiac disease (2%), diarrhea (1%), and Crohn's disease (1%). Postprocedure assessments did not reveal any detectable alteration on the function of the IED. One patient with an ICD had a 25-minute loss of capsule imaging due to recorder defect. Two patients with LVADs had interference with capsule image acquisition. Conclusions. CE did not interfere with IED function, including PM, ICD, and/or LVAD and thus appears safe. Additionally, PM and ICD do not appear to interfere with image acquisition but LVAD may interfere with capsule images and require that capsule leads be positioned as far away as possible from the IED to assure reliable image acquisition.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84877252187&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84877252187&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1155/2013/959234

DO - 10.1155/2013/959234

M3 - Article

C2 - 23710168

AN - SCOPUS:84877252187

VL - 2013

JO - Gastroenterology Research and Practice

JF - Gastroenterology Research and Practice

SN - 1687-6121

M1 - 959234

ER -