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)

Study protocol and rationale of "the UP project": evaluating the effectiveness of active breaks on health indicators in desk-based workers

Background

Excessive sedentary time has been negatively associated with several health outcomes, and physical activity alone does not seem to fully counteract these consequences. This panorama emphasizes the essential of sedentary time interruption programs. "The Up Project" seeks to assess the effectiveness of two interventions, one incorporating active breaks led by a professional and the other utilizing a computer application (self-led), of both equivalent duration and intensity. These interventions will be compared with a control group to evaluate their impact on physical activity levels, sedentary time, stress perception, occupational pain, and cardiometabolic risk factors among office workers.

Methods

This quasi-experimental study includes 60 desk-based workers from universities and educational institutes in Valparaiso, Chile, assigned to three groups: (a) booster breaks led by professionals, (b) computer prompts that are unled, and (c) a control group. The intervention protocol for both experimental groups will last 12 weeks (only weekdays). The following measurements will be performed at baseline and post-intervention: cardiometabolic risk based on body composition (fat mass, fat-free mass, and bone mass evaluated by DXA), waist circumference, blood pressure, resting heart rate, and handgrip strength. Physical activity and sedentary time will be self-reported and device-based assessed using accelerometry. Questionnaires will be used to determine the perception of stress and occupational pain.

Discussion

Governments worldwide are addressing health issues associated with sedentary behavior, particularly concerning individuals highly exposed to it, such as desk-based workers. Despite implementing certain strategies, there remains a noticeable gap in comprehensive research comparing diverse protocols. For instance, studies that contrast the outcomes of interventions led by professionals with those prompted by computers are scarce. This ongoing project is expected to contribute to evidence-based interventions targeting reduced perceived stress levels and enhancing desk-based employees' mental and physical well-being. The implications of these findings could have the capacity to lay the groundwork for future public health initiatives and government-funded programs.

What do national radiotherapy guidelines for patients with cardiac devices teach us?

The incidence of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) malfunctions caused by radiotherapy (RT) is approximately 5%. Although individual national guidelines and expert consensus documents exist, the increased use of RT to treat various cancers points out the need for a standardized document to guide risk assessment and management of CIEDs during RT. We describe potential adverse RT-related events on CIEDs as well as the proposed mechanism of dysfunction. We review the main current guidelines and recommendations, emphasizing similarities and differences.

Effect of simultaneous integrated boost concepts on photoneutron and distant out-of-field doses in VMAT for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

A simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) may result in increased out-of-field (DOOF) and photoneutron (HPN) doses in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer (PCA). This work therefore aimed to compare DOOF and HPN in flattened (FLAT) and flattening filter-free (FFF) 6‑MV and 10-MV VMAT treatment plans with and without SIB.

METHODS

Eight groups of 30 VMAT plans for PCA with 6 MV or 10 MV, with or without FF and with uniform (2 Gy) or SIB target dose (2.5/3.0 Gy) prescriptions (CONV, SIB), were generated. All 240 plans were delivered on a slab-phantom and compared with respect to measured DOOF and HPN in 61.8 cm distance from the isocenter. The 6‑ and 10-MV flattened VMAT plans with conventional fractionation (6- and 10-MV FLAT CONV) served as standard reference groups. Doses were analyzed as a function of delivered monitor units (MU) and weighted equivalent square field size Aeq. Pearson's correlation coefficients between the presented quantities were determined.

RESULTS

The SIB plans resulted in decreased HPN over an entire prostate RT treatment course (10-MV SIB vs. CONV -38.2%). Omission of the flattening filter yielded less HPN (10-MV CONV -17.2%; 10-MV SIB -22.5%). The SIB decreased DOOF likewise by 39% for all given scenarios, while the FFF mode reduced DOOF on average by 60%. A strong Pearson correlation was found between MU and HPN (r > 0.9) as well as DOOF (0.7 < r < 0.9).

CONCLUSION

For a complete treatment, SIB reduces both photoneutron and OOF doses to almost the same extent as FFF deliveries. It is recommended to apply moderately hypofractionated 6‑MV SIB FFF-VMAT when considering photoneutron or OOF doses.

Effects of Ionizing Radiation on Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) in Patients with Esophageal Cancer Undergoing Radiotherapy: A Pilot Study

(1) Background: The prevalence of cancer patients relying on cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) is steadily rising. The aim of this study was to evaluate RT-related malfunctions of CIEDs. (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyze sixteen patients with esophageal cancer who were treated with radiotherapy between 2012 and 2022 at the University Hospital Heidelberg. All patients underwent systemic evaluation including pre-therapeutic cardiological examinations of the CIED functionality and after every single irradiation. (3) Results: Sixteen patients, predominantly male (14) with a mean age of 77 (range: 56-85) years were enrolled. All patients received 28 fractions of radiotherapy with a cumulative total dose 58.8 Gy. The mean maximum dose at the CIEDs was 1.8 Gy. Following radiotherapy and during the one-year post-radiation follow-up period, there were no registered events associated with the treatment in this evaluation. (4) Conclusion: The study did not observe any severe CIED malfunctions following each radiation fraction or after completion of RT. Strict selection of photon energy and alignment with manufacturer-recommended dose limits appear to be important. Our study showed no major differences in the measured values of the pacing threshold, sensing threshold and lead impedance after RT.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation: A multicenter pre-post intervention safety evaluation of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator function

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) appears to be beneficial in selected patients with therapy-refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT). However, high-dose radiotherapy used for STAR-treatment may affect functioning of the patients' implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) by direct effects of radiation on ICD components or cardiac tissue. Currently, the effect of STAR on ICD functioning remains unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective pre-post multicenter study evaluating ICD functioning in the 12-month before and after STAR was performed. Patients with (non)ischemic cardiomyopathies with therapy-refractory VT and ICD who underwent STAR were included and the occurrence of ICD-related adverse events was collected. Evaluated ICD parameters included sensing, capture threshold and impedance. A linear mixed-effects model was used to investigate the association between STAR, radiotherapy dose and changes in lead parameters over time.

RESULTS

In total, 43 patients (88% male) were included in this study. All patients had an ICD with an additional right atrial lead in 34 (79%) and a ventricular lead in 17 (40%) patients. Median ICD-generator dose was 0.1 Gy and lead tip dose ranged from 0-32 Gy. In one patient (2%), a reset occurred during treatment, but otherwise, STAR and radiotherapy dose were not associated with clinically relevant alterations in ICD leads parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

STAR treatment did not result in major ICD malfunction. Only one radiotherapy related adverse event occurred during the study follow-up without patient harm. No clinically relevant alterations in ICD functioning were observed after STAR in any of the leads. With the reported doses STAR appears to be safe.

Pacemaker Relocation for Radiation Against Overlapping Lung Cancer

We experienced a patient after pacemaker (PM) implantation who had lung cancer of the left upper lobe that developed just behind the PM. The patient was an 81-year-old man with many complications. Radiation was the only treatment option. The PM had to be moved to another place to avoid direct radiation exposure to it. An epicardial pacing lead was implanted on the right ventricular epicardium, and the new generator was implanted in the abdomen. The patient was treated with a total of 62 Gy of radiotherapy for lung cancer, achieving a temporary shrinkage of the tumor. During the radiotherapy period, the PM functioned well without harmful events. When radiation therapy is needed in cases where the tumor overlaps the PM, relocation surgery using an epicardial pacing lead may be a useful option.

Example Radiation Oncology Policy for Managing Patients With Implanted Electronic Devices Other Than Implantable Cardiac Pacemakers or Defibrillators

PURPOSE

This article describes a community-based hospital's policy for the management of patients with medical implanted electronic devices other than pacemakers or implanted cardiac defibrillators (ICDs). The policy may be adapted as needed for other radiation oncology groups requiring a practical solution for managing the care of patients with implanted devices, noting the need for changes for departments offering proton, neutron, heavy ion, or magnetic resonance-guided linear accelerator (MR-linac) treatment modalities.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The policy was developed using a risk-based approach, with each patient's risk level determined based on the patient's dependence on the device, the anticipated dose to the device, and the type of treatment used. A similar approach is used for patients with pacemakers or ICDs, but this policy was designed to accommodate patients with other types of devices with care managed outside the department. Such devices include, but are not limited to, hepatic pumps, intrathecal pain pumps, neurostimulators, cochlear implants, and loop recorders.

RESULTS

The resulting definitions, guidelines, and proposed workflow were presented at the institution's multidisciplinary radiation oncology quality assurance committee monthly meeting and adopted as department policy in 2022. Recommendations incorporated in the policy include levels of patient monitoring and timing of device interrogation to minimize the risk of device malfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

The policy was written to guide the management of treatment of patients with a range of medical implanted electronic devices. This policy is currently in operation at a community-based hospital.

Impact of Radiotherapy on Malfunctions and Battery Life of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Cancer Patients

PURPOSE

This study analyses a large number of cancer patients with CIEDs for device malfunction and premature battery depletion by device interrogation after each radiotherapy fraction and compares different guidelines in regard to patient safety.

METHODS

From 2007 to 2022, a cohort of 255 patients was analyzed for CIED malfunctions via immediate device interrogation after every RT fraction.

RESULTS

Out of 324 series of radiotherapy treatments, with a total number of 5742 CIED interrogations, nine device malfunctions (2.8%) occurred. Switching into back-up/safety mode and software errors occurred four times each. Once, automatic read-out could not be performed. The median prescribed cumulative dose at planning target volume (PTV) associated with CIED malfunction was 45.0 Gy (IQR 36.0-64.0 Gy), with a median dose per fraction of 2.31 Gy (IQR 2.0-3.0 Gy). The median maximum dose at the CIED at time of malfunction was 0.3 Gy (IQR 0.0-1.3 Gy). No correlation between CIED malfunction and maximum photon energy (p = 0.07), maximum dose at the CIED (p = 0.59) nor treatment localization (p = 0.41) could be detected. After excluding the nine malfunctions, premature battery depletion was only observed three times (1.2%). Depending on the national guidelines, 1-9 CIED malfunctions in this study would have been detected on the day of occurrence and in none of the cases would patient safety have been compromised.

CONCLUSION

Radiation-induced malfunctions of CIEDs and premature battery depletion are rare. If recommendations of national safety guidelines are followed, only a portion of the malfunctions would be detected directly after occurrence. Nevertheless, patient safety would not be compromised.

From organ at risk to target organ: Dosimetric comparison of myocardial stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy between helical tomotherapy and volumetric arc therapy for refractory ventricular tachycardia

Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is an important type of arrhythmia with a risk of sudden death. Although implanted cardiac defibrillation and radiofrequency ablation are used together with medical treatments for VT, the treatment options are limited in cases that do not respond to them. Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) applied to VT substrates in resistant cases is an emerging treatment with positive results. Such clinical results have increased the interest in this subject. However, the ideal treatment device and method have not yet been described for this therapy, which is generally applied at a single fraction using various devices and methods. Herein, treatment planning was conducted for a total of 8 patients (11 VT substrates) using the Varian TrueBeam EDGE and TomoTherapy Radixact devices at a single center, and the results were compared dosimetrically. The Wilcoxon-signed rank test was used for the statistical analysis, and mean values were expressed as medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs). In the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (HT) plans, the plan coverages and conformity indexes were similar; meanwhile, the homogeneity indexes were 0.10 (IQR = 0.05) and 0.07 (IQR = 0.05), respectively, and were significantly better in the HT plan (p = 0.02). The gradient indexes were 3.18 (IQR = 0.8) and 5.33 (IQR = 3.68) in the VMAT and HT plans, respectively, and were significantly better in the VMAT plan. For the organs at risk, similar doses were observed. The maximum doses for the stomach and esophagus and the mean doses for the left lung and both lungs were significantly lower in the VMAT plan. Similarly, the maximum and mean doses for the cardiac substructures and great vessels were significantly lower in the VMAT plan. More homogeneous plans were obtained in HT, while a faster dose reduction and lower critical organ dose were observed in VMAT. Reasonable myocardial SABR plans could be obtained with both techniques. The effects of the dosimetric differences on the clinical outcomes should be evaluated in prospective clinical studies.

Risk of cardiac implantable device malfunction in cancer patients receiving proton therapy: an overview

Age is a risk factor for both cardiovascular disease and cancer, and as such radiation oncologists frequently see a number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) receiving proton therapy (PT). CIED malfunctions induced by PT are nonnegligible and can occur in both passive scattering and pencil beam scanning modes. In the absence of an evidence-based protocol, the authors emphasise that this patient cohort should be managed differently to electron- and photon- external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) patients due to distinct properties of proton beams. Given the lack of a PT-specific guideline for managing this cohort and limited studies on this important topic; the process was initiated by evaluating all PT-related CIED malfunctions to provide a baseline for future reporting and research. In this review, different modes of PT and their interactions with a variety of CIEDs and pacing leads are discussed. Effects of PT on CIEDs were classified into a variety of hardware and software malfunctions. Apart from secondary neutrons, cumulative radiation dose, dose rate, CIED model/manufacturer, distance from CIED to proton field, and materials used in CIEDs/pacing leads were all evaluated to determine the probability of malfunctions. The importance of proton beam arrangements is highlighted in this study. Manufacturers should specify recommended dose limits for patients undergoing PT. The establishment of an international multidisciplinary team dedicated to CIED-bearing patients receiving PT may be beneficial.

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.

Neutron dose from a 6-MV X-ray beam in radiotherapy

Although a 6-MV X-ray beam is employed clinically as a non-neutron-producing beam, no studies have reported how few neutrons are produced from a 6-MV beam. This study aimed to theoretically deduce the neutron dose from a 6-MV beam using Monte Carlo simulations for the notification of safety and risk in radiotherapy. Nuclei from a nuclear database with neutron separation energies below 6 MeV were surveyed, suggesting that the certain content of ²H in the human body may result in some contribution. Thus, Monte Carlo calculation considering ²H in a phantom was performed. The calculation suggested that the distribution of the neutron dose from a 6-MV beam consisted of two components: one had neutrons from ²H concentrated within an irradiation field, and the other had those due to other elements such as ¹⁸³W spreading from a gantry head to a treatment room. Although uncertainty owing to the normalization factor of the Monte Carlo calculations was a factor of three, the neutron doses at distances of 0 and 50 cm from an irradiation field were calculated as 27 and 1.5 nSv/MU, respectively, under intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The calculations suggest that neutrons produced by a 6-MV beam are approximately 70 and 20 times safer than those by a 10-MV beam in the case of IMRT/VMAT and total body irradiation, respectively. Thus, this study theoretically reported the approximate number of neutrons delivered by a 6-MV beam for the first time.

Radiotherapy-induced malfunctions of cardiac implantable electronic devices: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Radiation therapy (RT) may pose acute and long-term risks for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers (PMs) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs).

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association between RT and PM/ICD malfunctions in patients with cancer.

METHODS

We searched the literature using the PubMed, the Cochrane Library the Web of Science, and Embase for relative publications until April 2022. Of the 550 initially identified studies, 17 retrospective observational studies including 2454 patients were finally analyzed.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis showed that RT was associated with an increased risk of ICD malfunctions (odds ratio [OR] 2.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.74-4.33). Five studies were included in the subgroup analysis regarding photon beam energy, showing that radiation-induced CIED failure was more likely to occur in ICDs when beam energy was ≥10 MV (OR 5.28; 95% CI 2.14-13.03). Neutron-generating RT significantly increased the risk of CIED malfunctions (OR 3.97; 95% CI 1.70-9.26), especially the risk of reset (OR 5.79; 95% CI 2.37-14.12; P = .0001). We did not find significant differences in the risk of CIED failure between chest RT and other RT sites (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.63-1.88).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that ICDs are more likely to be affected by RT than PMs. These adverse events, especially reset, in patients with cancer were associated with neutron-generating RT and beam energy ≥10 MV. Given the increasing requirement for RT in several patients with cancer as well as the increasing implantation rates of CIEDs, a better risk stratification is needed in this setting.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on oncological radiotherapy in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device: Prevalence and predictors of device malfunction in 3121 patients

BACKGROUND

The number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) undergoing radiotherapy (RT) for cancer treatment is growing. At present, prevalence and predictors of RT-induced CIEDs malfunctions are not defined.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis conducted following the PRISMA recommendations. PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched from inception to 31/01/2022 for studies reporting RT-induced malfunctions in CIEDs patients. Aim was to assess the prevalence of RT-induced CIEDs malfunctions and identify potential predictors.

RESULTS

Thirty-two out of 3962 records matched the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 135 CIEDs malfunctions were detected among 3121 patients (6.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.1%-8.4%). The pooled prevalence increased moving from pacemaker (PM) to implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), and cardiac resynchronization therapy and defibrillator (CRT-D) groups (4.1%, 95% CI: 2.9-5.8; 8.2% 95% CI: 5.9-11.3; and 19.8%, 95% CI: 11.4-32.2 respectively). A higher risk ratio (RR) of malfunctions was found when neutron-producing energies were used as compared to non-neutron-producing energies (RR 9.98, 95% CI: 5.09-19.60) and in patients with ICD/CRT-D as compared to patients with PM/CRT-P (RR 2.07, 95% CI: 1.40-3.06). On the contrary, no association was found between maximal radiation dose at CIED >2 Gy and CIEDs malfunctions (RR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.31-2.76).

CONCLUSIONS

Radiotherapy related CIEDs malfunction had a prevalence ranging from 4% to 20%. The use of neutron-producing energies and more complex devices (ICD/CRT-D) were associated with higher risk of device malfunction, while the radiation dose at CIED did not significantly impact on the risk unless higher doses (>10 Gy) were used.

Local dose rate effects in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators with flattening filter free and flattened photon radiation

Purpose

In the beam penumbra of stereotactic body radiotherapy volumes, dose rate effects in implantable cardioverter–defibrillators (ICDs) may be the predominant cause for failures in the absence of neutron-generating photon energies. We investigate such dose rate effects in ICDs and provide evidence for safe use of lung tumor stereotactic radioablation with flattening filter free (FFF) and flattened 6 Megavolt (MV) beams in ICD-bearing patients.

Methods

Sixty-two ICDs were subjected to scatter radiation in 1.0, 2.5, and 7.0 cm distance to 100 Gy within a 5 × 5 cm² radiation field. Radiation was applied with 6 MV FFF beams (constant dose rate of 1400 cGy/min) and flattened (FLAT) 6 MV beams (430 cGy/min). Local dose rates (LDR) at the position of all ICDs were measured. All ICDs were monitored continuously.

Results

With 6 MV FFF beams, ICD errors occurred at distances of 1.0 cm (LDR 46.8 cGy/min; maximum ICD dose 3.4 Gy) and 2.5 cm (LDR 15.6 cGy/min; 1.1 Gy). With 6 MV FLAT beams, ICD errors occurred only at 1 cm distance (LDR 16.8 cGy/min; 3.9 Gy). No errors occurred at an LDR below 7 cGy/min, translating to a safe distance of 2.5 cm (1.5 Gy) in flattened and 7 cm (0.4 Gy) in 6 MV FFF beams.

Conclusion

A LDR in ICDs larger than 7 cGy/min may cause ICD malfunction. At identical LDR, differences between 6 MV FFF and 6 MV FLAT beams do not yield different rates of malfunction. The dominant reason for ICD failures could be the LDR and not the total dose to the ICD. For most stereotactic treatments, it is recommended to generate a planning risk volume around the ICD in which LDR larger than 7 cGy/min are avoided.

In-vitro investigation of cardiac implantable electronic device malfunction during and after direct photon exposure: A three-centres experience

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy may cause malfunction of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and pacemakers (PMs). We carried-out a multicentre randomized in-vitro study on 65 ICDs and 145 PMs to evaluate malfunctions during and after direct irradiation to doses up to 10 Gy.

METHODS

Three centres equipped with different linear accelerator and treatment-planning systems participated in the study. Computed Tomography (CT) acquisitions were performed to build the treatment plans. All devices were exposed to dose of 2, 5, or 10 Gy (6 MV). All devices underwent a baseline examination and 64 wireless real-time telemetry-transmissions (47 ICDs and 17 PMs) were monitored during photon exposures. All devices were interrogated after exposure and once monthly for six subsequent months.

RESULTS

Fifty-four of the 64 wireless-enabled CIEDs (84.4%) recorded noise-related interferences during exposure. In detail, 40/47 ICDs (85.1%) reported interference, of which 16 ICDs (34%) reported potentially clinically relevant pacing inhibition and inappropriate detections. Following exposure, a soft reset occurred in 1/145 PM (0.7%) while 7/145 PMs (4.8%) reported battery issues. During the six-month follow-up, 1/145 PM (0.7%) reported a soft reset, while 12/145 more PMs (8.3%) and 1/64 ICD (1.5%) showed abnormal battery depletion. All reported issues occurred independently of exposure dose. Finally, irreversible effects on software and battery life occurred in only non-MRI-compatible devices.

CONCLUSION

ICDs mostly featured real-time transient sensing issues, while PMs mostly experienced long-term battery or software issues that were observed immediately following radiation exposure and during follow-up. Irreversible effects on battery life and software occurred in only non-MRI-compatible devices.

Safety verification of carbon-ion radiotherapy for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs)

According to guidelines, carbon-ion beam therapy is considered to carry a high safety risk for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), although the actual impacts remain unclear. In this study, we investigated the safety of carbon-ion beam therapy in patients with CIEDs. Patients with CIEDs who underwent carbon-ion therapy at Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center between June 2010 and December 2019 were identified and investigated for abnormalities in the operation of their CIEDs, such as oversensing and resetting during irradiation, and abnormalities in operation after treatment. In addition, the risk of irradiation from carbon-ion beam therapy was evaluated by model simulations. Twenty patients (22 sites) with CIEDs were identified, 19 with pacemakers and one with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Treatments were completed without any problems, except for one case in which the treatment was discontinued because of worsening of the primary disease. Monte Carlo simulation indicated that the carbon beam irradiation produced neutrons at a constant and high level in the irradiation field. Nevertheless, with the distances between the CIEDs and the irradiation fields in the analyzed cases, the quantity of neutrons at the CIEDs was lower than that within the irradiation. Although carbon-ion beam therapy can be safely administered to patients with CIEDs, it is advisable to perform the therapy with sufficient preparation and backup devices because of the risks involved.

[ESC guidelines 2021 on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy : What's new?]

The new European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy were presented together with the new ESC heart failure guidelines at the ESC congress in September. The new document includes detailed sections on patient evaluation and clinical assessment, implantation, minimizing complications and patient follow-up. The guidelines have been updated and expanded particularly on the approach to reflex syncope, the indications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and the perioperative management. The indications for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) are now in line with the simultaneously published ESC heart failure guidelines. New physiological forms of stimulation and leadless pacing are now included in the guidelines.

Radiotherapy for patient with cardiac implantable electronic device, consensus from French radiation oncology society

Radiotherapy in patients with cardiac implantable electronic device such as pacemakers or defibrillators, is a clinical situation that is becoming increasingly common. There is a risk of interaction between the magnetic field induced by accelerators and the cardiac implantable electronic device, but also a risk of device dysfunction due to direct and/or indirect irradiation if the cardiac implantable electronic device is in the field of treatment. The risk can be dose-dependent, but it is most often independent of the total dose and occurs randomly in case of neutron production (stochastic effect). The presence of this type of device is therefore described as a contraindication for radiotherapy by the French national agency for the safety of medicines and health products (Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament et des produits de santé, ANSM). Nevertheless, since radiotherapy is often possible, it is advisable to respect the recommendations of good practice, in particular the eligibility criteria, the monitoring modalities before, during and after irradiation according to the type of treatment, the dose and the characteristics of the cardiac implantable electronic device. It is sometimes necessary to discuss repositioning the device and/or modifying the treatment plan to minimize the risk of cardiac implantable electronic device dysfunction. We present the update of the recommendations of the French society of oncological radiotherapy on in patients with cardiac implantable electronic device.

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.

A Review and Analysis of Managing Commonly Seen Implanted Devices for Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy

Purpose

This review article aims to consolidate information regarding existing and emerging implanted devices used in patients undergoing radiation therapy and to categorize levels of attention needed for each device, including which devices require monitoring throughout treatment.

Methods and Materials

Based on the collective information from scholar searches, manufacturers' technical reports, and institutional experiences in the past years, commonly present devices in patients with cancer are compiled. This work summarizes cardiac pacemaker, implanted cardiac defibrillator, hepatic pump, intrathecal pain pump, neurostimulator, shunt, loop recorder, and mediport. Three different classifications of implanted devices can be made based on the potential effect of radiation: life-dependent, nonlife-dependent but with adverse effects if overdosed, and devices without electronic circuits. Implanted devices that contain electronic circuits that would be life-dependent or have adverse effects if overdosed, include cardiac pacemakers, implanted cardiac defibrillators, programmable hepatic pumps, pain pumps, neurostimulators, and loop recorders.

Results

Dose exposure to these devices need to be calculated or measured in vivo, especially for cardiac implanted devices, and they should be minimized to assure continued healthy functioning. Treatment planning techniques should be chosen to reduce entry, exit and internal scatter dose. Lower energy photon beams should be used to decrease potential neutron contamination. Implanted devices without electronic circuits are less of a concern. If a patient is life-dependent on the implanted device, it is not recommended to treat the patient with proton therapy.

Conclusions

This study reviewed the management of patients with commonly seen implanted devices and summarized a workflow for identifying and planning when a patient has implanted devices. Classifications of implanted devices could help clinicians make proper decisions in regard to patients with specific implanted devices. Lastly, the management of such devices in the era of the pandemic is also discussed in this review article.

Implantable cardiac pacemaker failure by cumulative dose effects of flattening filter free beams

Cumulative dose effects, which are one of the main causes of errors that occur when an implantable cardiac pacemaker (ICP) is irradiated with ionizing radiation, induce permanent failure in ICPs. Although flattening filter free (FFF) beams, which are often used in stereotactic radiotherapy, are known to have different characteristics from conventional (with flattening filter [WFF]) beams, the cumulative dose effects on ICPs with FFF beams have been under-investigated. This study investigates ICP failure induced by cumulative dose effects of FFF beams. When the ICP placed in the center of the irradiation field was irradiated with 10 MV-FFF at 24 Gy/min, the cumulative dose at which failure occurred was evaluated on the basis of the failure criteria associated with high cumulative dose as described in the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 203. The ICP failures such as a mild battery depletion at a cumulative dose of 10 Gy, pacing-output voltage change >25% at a cumulative dose of 122 Gy, and the loss of telemetry capability at cumulative dose 134 Gy were induced by cumulative dose effects. The cumulative doses by which the cumulative dose effects of FFF beams induced ICP failure were not very different from those reported in previous studies with WFF beams. Therefore, radiotherapy with FFF beams (and WFF beams) for patients with ICP requires appropriate management for minimizing the cumulative dose effects.

Usefulness of remote monitoring for the early detection of back-up mode in implantable cardioverter defibrillators

BACKGROUND

Reversion of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to back-up mode degrades the operating capabilities of the device, puts patients at risk and requires rapid intervention by a manufacturer's technician.

AIM

To illustrate the usefulness of remote monitoring of ICDs for the early detection of reversion to back-up mode.

METHODS

In our centre, all patients implanted with an ICD, with or without resynchronisation, were offered remote monitoring as soon as the technology became available. Alerts triggered by the remote monitoring system were included prospectively in a register. During a mean follow-up of 5.7±1.3 years, a total of 1594 patients with an ICD (441 with resynchronisation function) followed with remote monitoring were included in the register.

RESULTS

Among 15,874 alerts, only 10 were related to a reversion to back-up mode. Among those, seven reversions were caused by radiotherapy, two were fake events and one was caused by magnetic resonance imaging. Except for the two fake events, the eight other patients had an emergency admission for the resetting and reprogramming of their ICD. None of the reversion to back-up mode alerts was followed by a clinical alert (i.e. a shock alert) before the ICD problem was resolved.

CONCLUSIONS

Reversion to back-up mode is a very rare event, accounting for 0.06% of total alerts; remote monitoring facilitates the early detection of this critical event to resolve the problem faster than the next scheduled follow-up. Remote monitoring can prevent serious damage to the patient and avoids systematic ambulatory control of the ICD after each radiotherapy session.

Safety of lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for the functioning of cardiac implantable electronic devices

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The prevalence of patients with a cardiac implantable device (CIED) developing cancer and requiring a course of radiotherapy (RT) is increasing remarkably. Previously published reports agree that standard and conventionally fractionated RT is usually safe for CIEDs, but no "in-vivo" reports are available on the potential effects of thoracic stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) regimens to CIEDs functioning. The purpose of our study is therefore to evaluate the effects of SABR on CIEDs (pacemakers [PM] or implantable cardiac defibrillators [ICD]) in a cohort of patients affected by primary or metastatic lung lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively collected all CIED-bearing patients undergoing SABR between 2007 and 2019 at our Institution. All CIEDs were interrogated before and after the SABR course to check for any malfunction. Prescription dose, beam energy and maximum dose (Dmax) to CIEDs were retrieved for each patient. Electrical records of the CIEDs were reviewed by the medical records.

RESULTS

Thirty-four consecutive patients (24 with a PM and 10 with an ICD), who underwent 38 separate SABR courses, were included in the study. Eight patients (24%) were PM-dependent. Prescription dose of SABR ranged 26-60 Gy in 1-8 fractions, with a photon energy ranging 6-to-10 MV (76.3% and 23.7%, respectively) and a median Dmax to CIEDs of 0.17 Gy (range 0.04-1.97 Gy). Electrical parameters were stable in post-treatment device programming visits and no transient or persistent alteration of the CIED function was recorded in any patient. No inappropriate interventions were recorded in the 10 ICD-bearing patients during the treatment fractions.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic SABR proved to be safe for CIEDs when the dose is kept <2 Gy and the beam energy is ≤10 MV, irrespective of the pacing-dependency and of the CIED type.

JASTRO/JCS Guidelines for radiotherapy in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices

This publication is an English version of the Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology (JASTRO) and The Japanese Circulation Society official guidelines for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Several radiotherapy-associated malfunctions have been reported for CIEDs such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Accordingly, guidelines for radiotherapy in patients with CIEDs have been issued by other countries and societies. In August 2010, JASTRO published the ‘Radiotherapy Guidelines for Patients with Pacemakers and Implantable Defibrillators’ (hereafter referred to as the former guidelines). Given new findings in this decade, a multidisciplinary working group of radiation oncologists, medical physicists, radiation therapists and cardiologists jointly reviewed and revised the former guidelines.

Comparison of Measured Data between Pre- and Post-Radiotherapy in a Patient with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Defibrillator

Although some researches proved the influence of radiation therapy (RT) on pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators, little has been reported on cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRTDs). We experienced a case of RT on CRTD and had a new finding.A patient with CRTD implanted for dilated cardiomyopathy was diagnosed with lung squamous cell carcinoma and started receiving RT. All the implanted devices, including the main body of CRTD, left ventricular lead (LV), right ventricular lead with high-voltage conductor, and right atrial lead, were from the same manufacturer. The radiation targeted the tumor of 67 mm in diameter in the right superior lobe for 5 min per session. The CRTD was outside the radiation field, which is 65 mm, but the leads were inside. Plan 1 used 2 Gy/fr with 8 megavolt photons, and Plan 1 was irradiated at 0° and 180° for 16 RT sessions. The dosage was increased to 3 Gy for Plan 2 for 4 sessions. Plan 3 used 2 Gy with 6 and 8 megavolt photons, and Plan 3 was irradiated at 27.7° and 200.7° for 11 RT sessions. Changes in measured parameters were assessed before and after RT.Changes in impedance of LV and high-voltage lead exceeded prespecified threshold. However, no significant errors were detected in the CRTD on the dosages and energy we used.We hypothesize that the lead insulator could have been affected by radiation.

Safe application of extensive radiotherapy to a cardiac resynchronization device

Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices undergoing radiotherapy (RT) are prone to the risk of device failure. Guidelines and manufacturer's instructions are lacking practical recommendations for cumulative radiation doses to pacemakers or implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The present case demonstrates the effect of RT of a Merkel cell carcinoma near the location of a cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker. Despite guideline recommendations, surgical relocation or de novo implantation of the device on the contralateral side was avoided to prevent the dissemination of tumour cells, inflammation, and wound healing complications. A total dose of 47.25 Gy applied in very close proximity to the cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker was carried out safely without jeopardizing the patient and any device malfunction during and after treatment within >1.5 years of follow‐up period. The present case demonstrates that high‐dose RT near to a cardiac resynchronization therapy device can be carried out safely. Special precautions during RT as well as close device follow‐up interrogations are mandatory. Large‐scale studies are needed for the true frequency of adverse events.

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.

Radiotherapy in Patients With a Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device

Recently, the Heart Rhythm Society published recommendations on management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) who require radiotherapy (RT). We aimed to report the experience of a teaching hospital, and discuss our practice in the context of recently published guidelines. We identified all consecutive CIED recipients (12,736 patients) who underwent RT between March 2006 and June 2017. Among them, 90 (1%) patients (78.2 ± 10 years, 73% male) had a CIED: 82 pacemakers and 8 implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Two patients required CIED extraction prior to RT for ipsilateral breast cancer (no device replacement in 1 patient). Four patients (5%) were considered at high-risk, 35 (39%) at intermediate-risk, and the remaining 50 (56%) at low-risk for CIED dysfunction. Overall, only a minority of patients followed recommended local protocol during RT delivery (31%) and during follow-up (56%). CIED malfunction was detected in 5 patients (6%), mainly back-up mode resetting (80%), with 4 (including 3 pelvic cancer location) patients initially classified as being at intermediate-risk and 1 at low-risk. Four out of the 5 patients with CEID malfunction had received neutron producing beams. In conclusion, our findings underline the lack of rigorous monitoring of patients undergoing RT (though CIED malfunction appears to be rare and relatively benign in nature), and emphasize the interest of considering neutron producing beam for risk stratification as recommended in recent guidelines. Optimization of patient's management requires a close collaboration between both CIED clinicians and radiation oncologists, and more systematic remote CIED monitoring may be helpful.

Prevalence and in-hospital outcomes of patients with malignancies undergoing de novo cardiac electronic device implantation in the USA

AIMS

To study the outcomes of cancer patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

De novo CIED implantations (2004-15; n = 2 670 590) from the National Inpatient Sample were analysed for characteristics and in-hospital outcomes, stratified by presence of cancer (no cancer, historical and current cancers) and further by current cancer type (haematological, lung, breast, colon, and prostate). Current and historical cancer prevalence has increased from 3.3% to 7.8%, and 5.8% to 7.8%, respectively, between 2004 and 2015. Current cancer was associated with increased adjusted odds ratio (OR) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) [composite of all-cause mortality, thoracic and cardiac complications, and device-related infection; OR 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-1.30], all-cause mortality (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.35-1.50), major bleeding (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.32-1.44), and thoracic complications (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.35-1.43). Differences in outcomes were observed according to cancer type, with significantly worse MACE, mortality and thoracic complications with lung and haematological malignancies, and increased major bleeding in colon and prostate malignancies. The risk of complications was also different according to CIED subtype.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of cancer patients amongst those undergoing CIED implantation has significantly increased over 12 years. Overall, current cancers are associated with increased mortality and worse outcomes, especially in patients with lung, haematological, and colon malignancies whereas there was no evidence that historical cancer had a negative impact on outcomes.

A randomized in vitro evaluation of transient and permanent cardiac implantable electronic device malfunctions following direct exposure up to 10 Gy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

High-dose 6‑MV radiotherapy may cause cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) to malfunction. To assess CIED malfunctions resulting from direct exposure up to 10 Gy, 100 pacemakers (PMs) and 40 implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) were evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CIEDs underwent baseline interrogation. In ICDs, antitachycardia therapies were disabled via the programmer while the detection windows were left enabled. A computed tomography (CT) scan was performed to build the corresponding treatment plan. CIEDs were "blinded" and randomized to receive single doses of either 2, 5, or, 10 Gy via a 6-MV linear accelerator (linac) in a water phantom. Twenty-two wireless telemetry-enabled CIEDs underwent a real-time session, and their function was recorded by the video camera in the bunker. The CIEDs were interrogated after exposure and once monthly for 6 months.

RESULTS

During exposure, regardless of dose, 90.9% of the CIEDs recorded electromagnetic interference, with 6 ICDs (27.3%) reporting pacing inhibition and inappropriate arrhythmia detections. After exposure, a backup reset was observed in 1 PM (0.7% overall, 1% among PMs), while 7 PMs (5% overall, 7% among PMs) reported battery issues (overall immediate malfunction rate was 5.7%). During follow-up, 4 PMs (2.9% overall; 4% among PMs) and 1 ICD (0.7% overall; 2.5% among ICDs) reported abnormal battery depletion, and 1 PM (0.7% overall; 1% among PMs) reported a backup reset (overall late malfunction rate was 4.3%).

CONCLUSION

Apart from transient electromagnetic interference, last-generation CIEDs withstood direct 6‑MV exposure up to 10 Gy. Permanent battery or software errors occurred immediately or later only in less recent CIEDs.

The effect of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using flattening filter-free beams on cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in clinical situations

PURPOSE

This study focused on determining risks from stereotactic radiotherapy using flattening filter-free (FFF) beams for patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIEDs). Two strategies were employed: a) a retrospective analysis of patients with CIEDs who underwent stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS)/SBRT at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre between 2014 and 2018 and b) an experimental study on the impact of FFF beams on CIEDs.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed. Subsequently, a phantom study was performed using 30 fully functional explanted CIEDs from two different manufacturers. Irradiation was carried out in a slab phantom with 6-MV and 10-MV FFF beams. First, a repetition-rate test (RRT) with a range of beam pulse frequencies was conducted. Then, multifraction SBRT (48 Gy/4 Fx) and single-fraction SBRT (28 Gy/1 Fx) treatment plans were used for lung tumors delivered to the phantom.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2018, 13 cases were treated with an FFF beam (6 MV, 1400 MU/min or 10 MV, 2400 MU/min), and 15 cases were treated with a flattening filter (FF) beam (6 MV, 600 MU/min). All the devices were positioned outside the treatment field at a distance of more than 5 cm, except for one case, and no failures were reported due to SBRT/SRS. In the phantom rep-rate tests, inappropriate sensing occurred, starting at a rep-rate of 1200 MU/min. Cardiac implantable electronic device anomalies during and after delivering VMAT-SBRT with a 10-MV FFF beam were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed that caution should be paid to managing CIED patients when they undergo SBRT using FFF beams, as it is recommended by AAPM TG-203. Correspondingly, it was found that for FFF beams although there is small risk from dose-rate effects, delivering high dose of radiation with beam energy greater than 6 MV and high-dose rate to CIEDs positioned in close vicinity of the PTV may present issues.

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.

Radiotherapy is safe in patients with implantable cardiac devices. Analysis of a systematic interrogation follow-up

INTRODUCTION

The number of patients who have a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIEDs) that undergo a course of radiotherapy is increasing due to the ageing population. The majority of clinical studies only evaluate any CIED malfunction at the end of a course of irradiation or in a case of there being symptoms of possible malfunction. As a result, little data has been collected on CIED status acquired during an active course of irradiation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We aimed to evaluate the correct functioning of a CIED during a course of radiotherapy. So, a retrospective analysis was made of all patients having CIEDS in a single institution during their course of radiotherapy. All CIEDs were systematically checked before and during the course of radiotherapy according to the risk of device failure and patient dependence.

RESULTS

Data was analysed from 56 patients (43 men, 13 women) with a mean age of 78.2 years, of whom 87.5% of the patients carried a pacemaker (PM), the 39% of the patients were PM dependent, and the remaining patients carried an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). An observable dose of irradiation was evident in only 10 cases. 69.1% of the CIEDs were checked daily and the remainder were checked weekly. During the radiotherapy course, 82% of the patients did not complain of any cardiological event. The CIED of five patients experienced an increase in the threshold and, in another case, a sudden reduction in the duration of the battery was reported. Another patient with a CIED experienced a cardiac insufficiency episode triggered by a ventricular tachycardia.

CONCLUSION

In conclusions, although adverse clinical events from exposure of a CIED to irradiation are rare, they can appear in any group of risk. No dose-dependency was observed on the malfunction of the CIED.

Targeted Intraoperative Radiotherapy Is a Safe Approach for Patients with Pacemakers: A Case Study and Literature Review

Case reports detailing the effects of targeted intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) on patients with cardiac pacemakers (PMs) are rare. This growing population sub-group requiring IORT and lack of standardized guidelines necessitate more practical published research. An 81-year-old patient with clinical stage II, T1 N0 grade III, triple-negative invasive ductal carcinoma and an implanted single-lead chamber PM (VVIR mode, model: Biotronik, type Effecta SR) received targeted intraoperative radiotherapy at the time of wide local excision and sentinel lymph node biopsy. It presents the shortest distance between the outer diameter of the PM and IORT applicator in literature. Target IORT was performed utilizing an Intrabeam device (50 kV, Carl Zeiss Surgical, Oberkochen, Germany). This case elucidates the successful use of targeted IORT for breast-conserving surgery in a patient with a single ipsilateral chamber VVIR mode PM. No device failure or malfunction was reported for the PM before, during, or after the procedure. These findings support the use of targeted IORT for patients diagnosed with early-stage breast carcinomas who have a PM implanted. However, further research is needed to understand the safety of other methods and devices for IORT patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices.