New-generation electronic appliances and cardiac implantable electronic devices: a systematic literature review of mechanisms and in vivo studies

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) functions are susceptible to electromagnetic interference (EMI) from electromagnetic fields (EMF). Data on EMI risks from new-generation electronic appliances (EA) are limited.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic literature review on the mechanisms of EMI, current evidence, and recently published trials evaluating the effect of EMF on CIEDs from electric vehicles (EV), smartphone, and smartwatch technology and summarize its safety data.

METHODS

Electronic databases, including PubMed and EMBASE, were searched for in vivo studies evaluating EMF strength and incidence between CIEDs and commercial EVs, new-generation smartphones, and new-generation smartwatches.

RESULTS

A total of ten studies (three on EVs, five on smartphones, one on smartphones, one on smartphones and smartwatches) were included in our systematic review. There was no report of EMI incidence associated with EVs or smartwatches. Magnet-containing smartphones (iPhone 12) can cause EMI when placed directly over CIEDs - thereby triggering the magnet mode; otherwise, no report of EMI was observed with other positions or smartphone models.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests CIED recipients are safe from general interaction with EVs/HEVs, smartphones, and smartwatches. Strictly, results may only be applied to commercial brands or models tested in the published studies. There is limited data on EMI risk from EVs wireless charging and smartphones with MagSafe technology.

Incidence and Predictors of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Malfunction with Radiotherapy Treatment

Aims: To investigate the incidence of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) malfunction with radiotherapy (RT) treatment and assess predictors of CIED malfunction. Methods: A 6-year retrospective analysis of patients who underwent RT with CIED identified through the radiation oncology electronic database. Clinical, RT (cumulative dose, dose per fraction, beam energy, beam energy dose, and anatomical area of RT) and CIED details (type, manufacturer, and device malfunction) were collected from electronic medical records. Results: We identified 441 patients with CIED who underwent RT. CIED encountered a permanent pacemaker (PPM) (78%), cardiac resynchronization therapy—pacing (CRT-P) (2%), an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) (10%), and a CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) (10%). The mean cumulative dose of RT was 36 gray (Gy) (IQR 1.8–80 Gy) and the most common beam energy used was photon ≥10 megavolt (MV) with a median dose of 7 MV (IQR 5–18 MV). We further identified 17 patients who had CIED malfunction with RT. This group had a higher cumulative RT dose of 42.5 Gy (20–77 Gy) and a photon dose of 14 MV (12–18 MV). None of the malfunctions resulted in clinical symptoms. Using logistic regression, the predictors of CIED malfunction were photon beam energy use ≥10 MV (OR 5.73; 95% CI, 1.58–10.76), anatomical location of RT above the diaphragm (OR 5.2, 95% CI, 1.82–15.2), and having a CIED from the ICD group (OR 4.6, 95% CI, 0.75–10.2). Conclusion: Clinicians should be aware of predictors of CIED malfunction with RT to ensure the safety of patients.

Radiotherapy for a Patient With Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Case Report

Cancer-related neuropathic pain is prevalent in up to 40% of patients with advanced disease. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used to treat chronic pain when other treatments are ineffective. Radiotherapy is an established treatment modality for patients with oncological diseases. The ionizing radiation from radiotherapy can potentially damage electrical devices, including SCS devices. Additionally, all parts of SCS can potentially interfere with radiotherapy delivery. We present a case of successful administration of radiotherapy to a patient without damaging the SCS device implanted in proximity to the target lesion.

Current Clinical Practice in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIED) Undergoing Radiotherapy (RT)

Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) undergoing radiotherapy (RT) are more common due to ageing of the population. With newer CIEDs implementing the complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) technology which allows the miniaturisation of CIED, it is also more susceptible to RT. Effects of RT on CIED ranges from device interference, device operational/memory errors of permanent damage. These malfunctions can cause life threatening clinical effects. Cumulative dose is not the only component of RT that causes CIED malfunction, as neutron use and dose rate effect also affects CIEDs. The management of this patient cohort in clinical practice is inconsistent due to lack of a consistent guideline from manufacturers and physician specialty societies. Our review will focus on the current clinical practice and the recent updated guidelines of managing patients with CIED undergoing RT. We aim to simplify the evidence and provide a simple and easy to use guide based on the recent guidelines.

Current clinical practice in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices undergoing radiotherapy: a literature review

Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) undergoing radiotherapy (RT) are more common due to the ageing of the population. With newer CIEDs' implementing the complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) technology which allows the miniaturization of CIED, it is also more susceptible to RT. Effects of RT on CIED ranges from device interference, device operational/memory errors of permanent damage. These malfunctions can cause life-threatening clinical effects. Cumulative dose is not the only component of RT that causes CIED malfunction, as neutron use and dose rate effect also affects CIEDs. The management of this patient cohort in clinical practice is inconsistent due to the lack of a consistent guideline from manufacturers and physician specialty societies. Our review will focus on the current clinical practice and the recently updated guidelines of managing patients with CIED undergoing RT. We aim to simplify the evidence and provide a simple and easy to use guide based on the recent guidelines.

Impact of different radiation techniques and doses on cardiac implantable electronic devices

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Purpose of this investigation was to get deeper insight into the impact of different radiation techniques and doses on cardiac implantable electric devices (CIEDs). We aimed to mimic a worst-case scenario with very high doses and external radiation being applied directly on the devices.

METHODS

Radiation was applied on 21 CIEDs as photon or electron therapy with maximum dose of 150Gy in fractions of 2 -20Gy. CIEDS were put directly into the beam. Brachytherapy was applied with doses of 6Gy to a maximum of 42Gy. Check-ups took place after every fraction and one week after radiation. We calculated the estimated potential risk for the health and survival of patients as well as the risk for CIEDs' loss of function.

RESULTS

28 life- or health-threatening errors occurred during photon therapy, 3/7 devices showed complete loss of function. During electron therapy, 31 potentially patient-threatening errors and 2 losses of function were detected. During brachytherapy, none of the devices showed loss of function but 8 patient-threatening errors occurred. Inadequate shock releases were mostly seen after photon and brachytherapy, random noises occurred more often during electron therapy. The earliest potentially serious error occurred during after 2Gy photon radiation and 6Gy brachytherapy. Losses of function occurred earliest at 80Gy.

CONCLUSION

The results underline the warning for precaution concerning CIED patients derived from recommendations in the literature. Our study offers new information especially about the impact of electron radiation and brachytherapy on CIEDs. Risk for the devices to for loss of telemetry or battery capacity might be negligible with normafractionated therapy.

Effect of X-ray dose rates higher than 8 Gy/min on the functioning of cardiac implantable electronic devices

Direct irradiation may cause malfunctioning of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Therefore, a treatment plan that does not involve direct irradiation of CIEDs should be formulated. However, CIEDs may be directly exposed to radiation because of the sudden intrafractional movement of the patient. The probability of CIED malfunction reportedly depends on the dose rate; however, reports are only limited to dose rates ≤8 Gy/min. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of X-ray dose rates >8 Gy/min on CIED function. Four CIEDs were placed at the center of the radiation field and irradiated using 6 MV X-ray with flattening filter free (6 MV FFF) and 10 MV X-ray with flattening filter free (10 MV FFF). The dose rate was 4-14 Gy/min for the 6 MV FFF and 4-24 Gy/min for 10 MV FFF beams. CIED operation was evaluated with an electrocardiogram during each irradiation. Three CIEDs malfunctioned in the 6 MV FFF condition, and all four CIEDs malfunctioned in the 10 MV FFF condition, when the dose rate was >8 Gy/min. Pacing inhibition was the malfunction observed in all four CIEDs. Malfunction occurred simultaneously along with irradiation and simultaneously returned to normal function on stopping the irradiation. An X-ray dose rate >8 Gy/min caused a temporary malfunction due to interference. Therefore, clinicians should be aware of the risk of malfunction and manage patient movement when an X-ray dose rate >8 Gy/min is used for patients with CIEDs.

PAIDEIA: pacemaker and implanted cardioverter defibrillator management in radiation therapy-a survey by the Young Group of the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO)

INTRODUCTION

The management of patients bearing a cardiac implantable electronic device and needing a radiotherapy treatment is an important clinical scenario. The aim of this survey was to evaluate the level of awareness within the Italian Radiation Oncologist community on this topic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey was promoted by the Young Group of Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) with a questionnaire made up of 22 questions allowing for multiple answers, which was administered, both online and on paper version. It was addressed to Radiation Oncologists, AIRO members, participating in the National Congress held in 2015.

RESULTS

A total of 113 questionnaires were collected back and analyzed (survey online: 50 respondents; paper version: 63). The answers showed a good level of awareness on the issue, but with a nonhomogeneous adherence to the different published guidelines (GL). There is a general low rate of referral for a preliminary cardiological evaluation in patients bearing PM/ICDs, in line with some published surveys; nevertheless, a focused attention to certain specific treatment factors and patient-centered point of view emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

A generally good awareness of this topic was shown but homogeneous application of GL was not observed, possibly due to the multiplicity of available GL. A prospective data collection could help to better clarify the shadows on this topics.

Management of radiotherapy patients with implanted cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators: A Report of the AAPM TG-203†

Managing radiotherapy patients with implanted cardiac devices (implantable cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators) has been a great practical and procedural challenge in radiation oncology practice. Since the publication of the AAPM TG-34 in 1994, large bodies of literature and case reports have been published about different kinds of radiation effects on modern technology implantable cardiac devices and patient management before, during, and after radiotherapy. This task group report provides the framework that analyzes the potential failure modes of these devices and lays out the methodology for patient management in a comprehensive and concise way, in every step of the entire radiotherapy process.

Management of cardiac implantable devices in patients undergoing radiotherapy

The delivery of radiotherapy to patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) is not an infrequent event. Consideration of the potential issues for patients is an important part of their care. An overview of CIEDs is provided, including the potential problems encountered and the steps that can be taken to mitigate this risk.

Management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) undergoing radiotherapy: A consensus document from Associazione Italiana Aritmologia e Cardiostimolazione (AIAC), Associazione Italiana Radioterapia Oncologica (AIRO), Associazione Italiana Fisica Medica (AIFM)

The management of patients with a cardiac implanted electronic device (CIED) receiving radiotherapy (RT) is challenging and requires a structured multidisciplinary approach. A consensus document is presented as a result of a multidisciplinary working group involving cardiac electrophysiologists, radiation oncologists and physicists in order to stratify the risk of patients with CIED requiring RT and approaching RT sessions appropriately. When high radiation doses and beam energy higher than 6MV are used, CIED malfunctions can occur during treatment. In our document, we reviewed the different types of RT and CIED behavior in the presence of ionizing radiations and electromagnetic interferences, from the cardiologist's, radiation oncologist's and medical physicist's point of view. We also reviewed in vitro and in vivo literature data and other national published guidelines on this issue so far. On the basis of literature data and consensus of experts, a detailed approach based on risk stratification and appropriate management of RT patients with CIEDs is suggested, with important implications for clinical practice.

Radiotherapy for Patients with Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices: A Review

Because cardiovascular implantable electronic devices are increasingly indicated in older patients, and the burden of cancer is rising with the growth and aging of the world population, the management of patients with cardiac devices who require radiotherapy for cancer treatment is a timely concern. Device malfunctions might occur in as high as 3% of radiotherapy courses, posing a substantial issue in clinical practice. A nonsystematic comprehensive review was undertaken. We searched PubMed and the MEDLINE database for randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, observational studies, in vitro/in vivo studies, and case reports. Articles were selected by 2 independent reviewers, and emphasis was given to information of interest to a general medical readership. The pathophysiology and predictors of cardiovascular implantable electronic device malfunction due to radiotherapy are reviewed, recommendations for the management of patients with such devices undergoing radiotherapy are summarized, and the clinical significance and future directions of this field are discussed. Radiotherapy-induced device malfunctions are rare, but because of the potential complications, the development of evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices undergoing radiotherapy is a timely concern.

A review of implantable cardioverter defibrillator failures during radiation therapy in three Sydney hospitals

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, using radiation energies greater than 10 MV in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) has been contra-indicated due to the risk of a power on reset (POR) occurring. The ICD is often greater than 30 cm from the treatment field and subject to scatter radiation only. The aim of this study was to use recent patient cases to verify published failure rates and treatment recommendations.

METHOD

Five patients with ICDs who experienced a device malfunction during radiation therapy treatments were identified in three Sydney hospitals between 2008 and 2012. The types of treatments delivered during these events were assessed. Further assessment of all ICD patients at one Sydney hospital during this time was carried out to assess the rate of ICD failure during high energy treatments using 18 MV.

RESULTS

All ICDs that suffered malfunctions were exposed to scatter radiation only. All were exposed to partial or exclusive irradiation using 18 MV photons. Accumulated doses to the ICDs were estimated to be well below accepted dose limits found in literature. One centre reported a 22.2% rate of POR during exposure to 18 MV radiation therapy during this time frame.

CONCLUSIONS

Where possible, radiation therapy using energies greater than 10 MV should be avoided for ICD patients. While the use of these energies carries a risk of failure, it must be weighed against potential benefit to the patient requiring treatment if no alternatives are available. Stringent monitoring of these patients, including regular cardiac device checks and ECG monitoring is recommended if treatment is to proceed with energies greater than 10 MV.

Radiotherapy-Induced Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Dysfunction in Patients With Cancer

Radiotherapy can affect the electronic components of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) resulting in malfunction and/or damage. We sought to assess the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of CIED dysfunction (CIED-D) after radiotherapy for cancer treatment. Clinical characteristics, cancer, different types of CIEDs, and radiation dose were evaluated. The investigation identified 230 patients, mean age 78 ± 8 years and 70% were men. A total of 199 patients had pacemakers (59% dual chamber), 21 (9%) cardioverter-defibrillators, and 10 (4%) resynchronizators or defibrillators. The left pectoral (n = 192, 83%) was the most common CIED location. Sixteen patients (7%) experienced 18 events of CIED-D after radiotherapy. Reset to backup pacing mode was the most common encountered dysfunction, and only 1 (6%) patient of those with CIED-D experienced symptoms of atrioventricular dyssynchrony. Those who had CIED-D tended to have a shorter device age at the time of radiotherapy compared to those who did not (2.5 ± 1.5 vs 3.8 ± 3.4 years, p = 0.09). The total dose prescribed to the tumor was significantly greater among those who had CIED-D (66 ± 30 vs 42 ± 23 Gy, p <0.0001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified the total dose prescribed to the tumor as the only independent predictor for CIED-D (odds ratio 1.19 for each increase in 5 Gy, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.31, p = 0.0005). In conclusion, in this large population of patients with CIEDs undergoing radiotherapy for cancer treatment, the occurrence of newly diagnosed CIED-D was 7%, and the reset to backup pacing mode was the most common encountered dysfunction. The total dose prescribed to the tumor was a predictor of CIED-D. Importantly, although the unpredictability of CIEDs under radiotherapy is still an issue, none of our patients experienced significant symptoms, life-threatening arrhythmias, or conduction disorders.

Safety and interaction of patients with implantable cardiac defibrillators driving a hybrid vehicle

BACKGROUND

Electromagnetic interference (EMI) can affect the function of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD). Hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) have increased popularity and are a potential source of EMI. Little is known about the in vivo effects of EMI generated by HEV on ICD.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the in vivo interaction between EMI generated by HEV with ICD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty patients (73±9 y/o; 80% male) with stable ICD function were exposed to EMI generated by a Toyota Prius Hybrid®. The vehicle was lifted above the ground, allowing safe changes in engine rotation and consequent variations in electromagnetic emission. EMI was measured (NARDA STS® model EHP-50C) and expressed in A/m (magnetic), Volts/m (electrical), and Hertz (frequency). Six positions were evaluated: driver, front passenger, right and left back seats, outside, at the back and front of the car. Each position was evaluated at idle, 30 mph, 60 mph and variable speeds (acceleration-deceleration-brake). All ICD devices were continuously monitored during the study. The levels of EMI generated were low (highest mean levels: 2.09A/m at right back seat at 30 mph; and 3.5V/m at driver seat at variable speeds). No episode of oversensing or inadvertent change in ICD programming was observed.

CONCLUSION

It is safe for patients with ICD to interact with HEV. This is the first study to address this issue using an in vivo model. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the interaction of different models of HEV or electric engine with ICD or unipolar pacemakers.

Radiotherapy in patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a literature review

An increasing number of patients with implantable cardiac rhythm devices undergo radiotherapy (RT) for cancer and are thereby exposed to the risk of device failure. Current safety recommendations seem to have limitations by not accounting for the risk of pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators malfunctioning at low radiation doses. Besides scant knowledge about optimal safety measures, only little is known about the exact prevalence of patients with devices undergoing RT. In this review, we provide a short overview of the principles of RT and present the current evidence on the predictors and mechanisms of device malfunctions during RT. We also summarize practical recommendations from recent publications and from the industry. Strongly associated with beam energy of photon RT, device malfunctions occur at ∼3% of RT courses, posing a substantial issue in clinical practice. Malfunctions described in the literature typically consist of transient software disturbances and only seldom manifest as a permanent damage of the device. Through close cooperation between cardiologists and oncologists, a tailored individualized approach might be necessary in this patient group in waiting time for updated international guidelines in the field.

DEGRO/DGK guideline for radiotherapy in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices

An increasing number of patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) have cardiac implantable electronic devices [CIEDs, cardiac pacemakers (PMs) and implanted cardioverters/defibrillators (ICDs)]. Ionizing radiation can cause latent and permanent damage to CIEDs, which may result in loss of function in patients with asystole or ventricular fibrillation. Reviewing the current literature, the interdisciplinary German guideline (DEGRO/DGK) was developed reflecting patient risk according to type of CIED, cardiac condition, and estimated radiation dose to the CIED. Planning for RT should consider the CIED specifications as well as patient-related characteristics (pacing-dependent, previous ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation). Antitachyarrhythmia therapy should be suspended in patients with ICDs, who should be under electrocardiographic monitoring with an external defibrillator on stand-by. The beam energy should be limited to 6 (to 10) MV CIEDs should never be located in the beam, and the cumulative scatter radiation dose should be limited to 2 Gy. Personnel must be able to respond adequately in the case of a cardiac emergency and initiate basic life support, while an emergency team capable of advanced life support should be available within 5 min. CIEDs need to be interrogated 1, 3, and 6 months after the last RT due to the risk of latent damage.

Use of graphene as protection film in biological environments

Corrosion of metal in biomedical devices could cause serious health problems to patients. Currently ceramics coating materials used in metal implants can reduce corrosion to some extent with limitations. Here we proposed graphene as a biocompatible protective film for metal potentially for biomedical application. We confirmed graphene effectively inhibits Cu surface from corrosion in different biological aqueous environments. Results from cell viability tests suggested that graphene greatly eliminates the toxicity of Cu by inhibiting corrosion and reducing the concentration of Cu²⁺ ions produced. We demonstrated that additional thiol derivatives assembled on graphene coated Cu surface can prominently enhance durability of sole graphene protection limited by the defects in graphene film. We also demonstrated that graphene coating reduced the immune response to metal in a clinical setting for the first time through the lymphocyte transformation test. Finally, an animal experiment showed the effective protection of graphene to Cu under in vivo condition. Our results open up the potential for using graphene coating to protect metal surface in biomedical application.

Management of radiation oncology patients with a pacemaker or ICD: a new comprehensive practical guideline in The Netherlands. Dutch Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology (NVRO)

Current clinical guidelines for the management of radiotherapy patients having either a pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (both CIEDs: Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices) do not cover modern radiotherapy techniques and do not take the patient’s perspective into account. Available data on the frequency and cause of CIED failure during radiation therapy are limited and do not converge. The Dutch Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology (NVRO) initiated a multidisciplinary task group consisting of clinical physicists, cardiologists, radiation oncologists, pacemaker and ICD technologists to develop evidence based consensus guidelines for the management of CIED patients. CIED patients receiving radiotherapy should be categorised based on the chance of device failure and the clinical consequences in case of failure. Although there is no clear cut-off point nor a clear linear relationship, in general, chances of device failure increase with increasing doses. Clinical consequences of device failures like loss of pacing, carry the most risks in pacing dependent patients. Cumulative dose and pacing dependency have been combined to categorise patients into low, medium and high risk groups. Patients receiving a dose of less than 2 Gy to their CIED are categorised as low risk, unless pacing dependent since then they are medium risk. Between 2 and 10 Gy, all patients are categorised as medium risk, while above 10 Gy every patient is categorised as high risk. Measures to secure patient safety are described for each category. This guideline for the management of CIED patients receiving radiotherapy takes into account modern radiotherapy techniques, CIED technology, the patients’ perspective and the practical aspects necessary for the safe management of these patients. The guideline is implemented in The Netherlands in 2012 and is expected to find clinical acceptance outside The Netherlands as well.

Comparison of the effects of high-energy photon beam irradiation (10 and 18 MV) on 2 types of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy for cancer may be required for patients with implantable cardiac devices. However, the influence of secondary neutrons or scattered irradiation from high-energy photons (≥10 MV) on implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) is unclear. This study was performed to examine this issue in 2 ICD models.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

ICDs were positioned around a water phantom under conditions simulating clinical radiation therapy. The ICDs were not irradiated directly. A control ICD was positioned 140 cm from the irradiation isocenter. Fractional irradiation was performed with 18-MV and 10-MV photon beams to give cumulative in-field doses of 600 Gy and 1600 Gy, respectively. Errors were checked after each fraction. Soft errors were defined as severe (change to safety back-up mode), moderate (memory interference, no changes in device parameters), and minor (slight memory change, undetectable by computer).

RESULTS

Hard errors were not observed. For the older ICD model, the incidences of severe, moderate, and minor soft errors at 18 MV were 0.75, 0.5, and 0.83/50 Gy at the isocenter. The corresponding data for 10 MV were 0.094, 0.063, and 0 /50 Gy. For the newer ICD model at 18 MV, these data were 0.083, 2.3, and 5.8 /50 Gy. Moderate and minor errors occurred at 18 MV in control ICDs placed 140 cm from the isocenter. The error incidences were 0, 1, and 0 /600 Gy at the isocenter for the newer model, and 0, 1, and 6 /600Gy for the older model. At 10 MV, no errors occurred in control ICDs.

CONCLUSIONS

ICD errors occurred more frequently at 18 MV irradiation, which suggests that the errors were mainly caused by secondary neutrons. Soft errors of ICDs were observed with high energy photon beams, but most were not critical in the newer model. These errors may occur even when the device is far from the irradiation field.

Case study thoracic radiotherapy in an elderly patient with pacemaker: the issue of pacing leads

To assess clinical outcome of patients with pacemaker treated with thoracic radiation therapy for T8-T9 paravertebral chloroma. A 92-year-old male patient with chloroma presenting as paravertebral painful and compressive (T8-T9) mass was referred for radiotherapy in the Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie. The patient presented with cardiac dysfunction and a permanent pacemaker that had been implanted prior. The decision of Multidisciplinary Meeting was to deliver 30 Gy in 10 fractions for reducing the symptoms and controlling the tumor growth. The patient received a total dose of 30 Gy in 10 fractions using 4-field conformal radiotherapy with 20-MV photons. The dose to pacemaker was 0.1 Gy but a part of the pacing leads was in the irradiation fields. The patient was treated the first time in the presence of his radiation oncologist and an intensive care unit doctor. Moreover, the function of his pacemaker was monitored during the entire radiotherapy course. No change in pacemaker function was observed during any of the radiotherapy fractions. The radiotherapy was very well tolerated without any side effects. The function of the pacemaker was checked before and after the radiotherapy treatment by the cardiologist and no pacemaker dysfunction was observed. Although updated guidelines are needed with acceptable dose criteria for implantable cardiac devices, it is possible to treat patients with these devices and parts encroaching on the radiation field. This case report shows we were able to safely treat our patient through a multidisciplinary approach, monitoring the patient during each step of the treatment.

Spinal cord stimulators and radiotherapy: first case report and practice guidelines

Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) are a well-recognised treatment modality in the management of a number of chronic neuropathic pain conditions, particularly failed back syndrome and radiculopathies. The implantable pulse generator (IPG) component of the SCS is designed and operates in a similar fashion to that of a cardiac pacemaker. The IPG consists of an electrical generator, lithium battery, transmitter/receiver and a minicomputer. When stimulated, it generates pulsed electrical signals which stimulate the dorsal columns of the spinal cord, thus alleviating pain. Analogous to a cardiac pacemaker, it can be potentially damaged by ionising radiation from a linear accelerator, in patients undergoing radiotherapy. Herein we report our clinical management of the first reported case of a patient requiring adjuvant breast radiotherapy who had a SCS in situ. We also provide useful practical recommendations on the management of this scenario within a radiation oncology department.

Measuring pacemaker dose: a clinical perspective

Recently in our clinic, we have seen an increased number of patients presenting with pacemakers and defibrillators. Precautions are taken to develop a treatment plan that minimizes the dose to the pacemaker because of the adverse effects of radiation on the electronics. Here we analyze different dosimeters to determine which is the most accurate in measuring pacemaker or defibrillator dose while at the same time not requiring a significant investment in time to maintain an efficient workflow in the clinic. The dosimeters analyzed here were ion chambers, diodes, metal-oxide-semiconductor field effect transistor (MOSFETs), and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeters. A simple phantom was used to quantify the angular and energy dependence of each dosimeter. Next, 8 patients plans were delivered to a Rando phantom with all the dosimeters located where the pacemaker would be, and the measurements were compared with the predicted dose. A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) image was obtained to determine the dosimeter response in the kilovoltage energy range. In terms of the angular and energy dependence of the dosimeters, the ion chamber and diode were the most stable. For the clinical cases, all the dosimeters match relatively well with the predicted dose, although the ideal dosimeter to use is case dependent. The dosimeters, especially the MOSFETS, tend to be less accurate for the plans, with many lateral beams. Because of their efficiency, we recommend using a MOSFET or a diode to measure the dose. If a discrepancy is observed between the measured and expected dose (especially when the pacemaker to field edge is <10 cm), we recommend analyzing the treatment plan to see whether there are many lateral beams. Follow-up with another dosimeter rather than repeating multiple times with the same type of dosimeter. All dosimeters should be placed after the CBCT has been acquired.