Treatment approach, delivery, and follow-up evaluation for cardiac rhythm disease management patients receiving radiation therapy: Retrospective physician surveys including chart reviews at numerous centers

Management of Patients with Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices Undergoing Radiation Therapy: A National Survey of Canadian Multidisciplinary Radiation Oncology Professionals

Purpose

This study aimed to characterize contemporary management of Canadian patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) undergoing radiation therapy (RT) in light of updated American Association of Physicists in Medicine guidelines.

Methods and Materials

A 22-question web-based survey was distributed to members of the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology, Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists, and Canadian Association of Medical Radiation Technologists from January to February 2020. Respondent demographics, knowledge, and management practices were elicited. Statistical comparisons by respondent demographics were performed using χ² and Fisher exact tests.

Results

In total, 155 surveys were completed by 54 radiation oncologists, 26 medical physicists, and 75 radiation therapists in academic (51%) and community (49%) practices across all provinces. The majority of respondents (77%) had managed >10 patients with CIEDs in their career. Most respondents (70%) reported using risk-stratified institutional management protocols. Respondents used manufacturer recommendations, rather than American Association of Physicists in Medicine or institutionally recommended dose limits, when the manufacturer limit was 0 Gy (44%), 0 to 2 Gy (45%), or >2 Gy (34%). The majority of respondents (86%) reported institutional policies to refer to a cardiologist for CIED evaluation both before and after completion of RT. Cumulative dose to CIED, pacing dependence, and neutron production were considered during risk stratification by 86%, 74%, and 50% of participants, respectively. Dose and energy thresholds for high-risk management were not known by 45% and 52% of respondents, with radiation oncologists and radiation therapists significantly less likely to report thresholds than medical physicists (P < .001). Although 59% of respondents felt comfortable managing patients with CIEDs, community respondents were less likely to feel comfortable than academic respondents (P = .037).

Conclusions

The management of Canadian patients with CIEDs undergoing RT is characterized by variability and uncertainty. National consensus guidelines may have a role in improving provider knowledge and confidence in caring for this growing population.

Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Undergoing Radiation Therapy: Insights from a Ten-Year Tertiary Center Experience

Background: The number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) receiving radiotherapy (RT) is increasing. The management of CIED-carriers undergoing RT is challenging and requires a collaborative multidisciplinary approach. Aim: The aim of the study is to report the real-world, ten-year experience of a tertiary multidisciplinary teaching hospital. Methods: We conducted an observational, real-world, retrospective, single-center study, enrolling all CIED-carriers who underwent RT at the San Raffaele University Hospital, between June 2010 and December 2021. All devices were MRI-conditional. The devices were programmed to an asynchronous pacing mode for patients who had an intrinsic heart rate of less than 40 beats per minute. An inhibited pacing mode was used for all other patients. All tachyarrhythmia device functions were temporarily disabled. After each RT session, the CIED were reprogrammed to the original settings. Outcomes included adverse events and changes in the variables that indicate lead and device functions. Results: Between June 2010 and December 2021, 107 patients were enrolled, among which 63 (58.9%) were pacemaker carriers and 44 (41.1%) were ICD carriers. Patients were subjected to a mean of 16.4 (±10.7) RT sessions. The most represented tumors in our cohort were prostate cancer (12; 11%), breast cancer (10; 9%) and lung cancer (28; 26%). No statistically significant changes in device parameters were recorded before and after radiotherapy. Generator failures, power-on resets, changes in pacing threshold or sensing requiring system revision or programming changes, battery depletions, pacing inhibitions and inappropriate therapies did not occur in our cohort of patients during a ten-year time span period. Atrial arrhythmias were recorded during RT session in 14 patients (13.1%) and ventricular arrhythmias were observed at device interrogation in 10 patients (9.9%). Conclusions: Changes in device parameters and arrhythmia occurrence were infrequent, and none resulted in a clinically significant adverse event.

Assessment of Radiation-Induced Malfunction in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

Background

Radiation therapy (RT) is a standard cancer treatment modality, and an increasing number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are being referred for RT. The goals of this study were as follows: (i) to determine the incidence of CIED malfunction following RT; (ii) to characterize the various types of malfunctions that occur; and (iii) to identify risk factors associated with CIED malfunction following RT.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients with CIEDs who received RT between 2007 and 2018 at 4 Canadian centres (Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Kingston General Hospital, Hamilton Health Sciences Centre, and University of Ottawa Heart Institute) was conducted. Patients underwent CIED interrogation after completion of RT, to assess for late damage to the CIEDs. Data on demographics, devices, and RT were compared for the primary outcome of device malfunction.

Results

Of 1041 patients with CIEDs who received RT, 811 patients with complete data were included. Device malfunctions occurred in 32 of 811 patients (4%). The most common device malfunctions were reduced ventricular/atrial sensing (in 13 of 32 [41%]), an increase in lead threshold (in 9 of 32 [22%]), lead noise (in 5 of 32 [16%]), and electrical reset (in 2 of 32 [6%]). Higher beam energy (≥ 10 MV) was associated with malfunction (P < 0.0001). Radiation dose was not significantly different between the malfunction and non-malfunction groups (58.3 cGy vs 65 cGy, respectively, P = 0.71).

Conclusions

Although RT-induced CIED malfunctions are rare (occurring in 4% of patients with a CIED who undergo RT), collaborative efforts between radiation oncologists and cardiac rhythm device clinics to optimize CIED monitoring are needed, to detect and manage CIED malfunctions. Malfunctions are more common in patients receiving higher–beam energy (≥10MV)RT.

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.

Radiotherapy-induced malfunctions of cardiac implantable electronic devices in cancer patients

The number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) requiring radiation therapy (RT) for cancer treatment is increasing. The purpose of this study is to estimate the prevalence, possible predictors, and clinical impact of RT-related CIEDs malfunctions. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all pacemaker (PM)/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients who underwent RT in the last 14 years. One hundred and twenty-seven patients who underwent 150 separate RT courses were analysed (99 with a PM and 27 with an ICD). Of note, 21/127 (16.6%) patients were PM-dependent. Neutron-producing RT was used in 37/139 (26.6%) courses, whereas non-neutron-producing RT was used in 102/139 (73.4%) courses. The cumulative dose (Dmax) delivered to the CIED exceeded 5 Gy only in 2/132 (1.5%) cases. Device malfunctions were observed in 3/150 (2%) RT courses, but none was life-threatening or led to a major clinical event and all were resolved by CIED reprogramming. In all cases, the Dmax delivered to the CIED was < 2 Gy. Two malfunctions occurred in the 37 patients treated with neutron-producing RT (5.4%), and 1 malfunction occurred in the 102 patients treated with non-neutron-producing RT (1%) (p = 0.17). Device relocation from the RT field was performed in 2/127 (1.6%) patients. RT in patients with CIED is substantially safe if performed in an appropriately organized environment, with uncommon CIEDs malfunctions and no major clinical events. Neutron-producing energies, rather than Dmax, seem to increase the risk of malfunctions. Device interrogation on a regular basis is advised to promptly manage CIED malfunctions.

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.

Radiotherapy for patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: an 11-year experience

PURPOSE

As cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are increasingly indicated in older patients, and the burden of cancer is rising with the aging population, the management of patients with CIEDs who require radiotherapy (RT) is a timely concern. The objective of the study was to evaluate the management of, and malfunctions in, patients with CIEDs undergoing RT.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients with CIEDs receiving RT at Kingston Health Sciences Center from March 2007-April 2018 was conducted. Data on demographics, RT, devices, and management were compared for the primary outcome of device malfunction.

RESULTS

Of the 189 patients with CIEDs receiving a total of 297 courses of RT, 4 patients (2.1%) experienced device malfunctions. Higher beam energy was associated with a malfunction (p < 0.05). Patients with malfunctions received a lower dose of radiation per fraction (267 ± 93 cGy vs. 477 ± 282 cGy; p < 0.05) and were significantly younger (71.4 ± 2.2 years vs. 77.8 ± 9.8 years; p < 0.01) compared to patients without malfunctions.

CONCLUSION

RT-induced device malfunctions are rare, but given the potential complications, a better understanding of the potential predictors of malfunction and the development of evidence-based guidelines will help optimize patient safety.

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.

Report of whole-brain radiation therapy in a patient with an implanted deep brain stimulator: important neurosurgical considerations and radiotherapy practice principles

Patients with implanted neuromodulation devices present potential challenges for radiation therapy treatment planning and delivery. Although guidelines exist regarding the irradiation of cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators, fewer data and less clinical experience exist regarding the effects of radiation therapy on less frequently used devices, such as deep brain stimulators. A 79-year-old woman with a history of coarse tremors effectively managed with deep brain stimulation presented with multiple intracranial metastases from a newly diagnosed lung cancer and was referred for whole-brain radiation therapy. She was treated with a German helmet technique to a total dose of 30 Gy in 10 fractions using 6 MV photons via opposed lateral fields with the neurostimulator turned off prior to delivery of each fraction. The patient tolerated the treatment well with no acute complications and no apparent change in the functionality of her neurostimulator device or effect on her underlying neuromuscular disorder. This represents the first reported case of the safe delivery of whole-brain radiation therapy in a patient with an implanted neurostimulator device. In cases such as this, neurosurgeons and radiation oncologists should have discussions with patients about the risks of brain injury, device malfunction or failure of the device, and plans for rigorous testing of the device before and after radiation therapy.

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.