Relevant risk for interaction seen with cardiac implantable electronic devices; no signs of cardiac damage seen during testing<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n
By Elana Gotkine HealthDay Reporter<\/b>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n
WEDNESDAY, April 9, 2025 (HealthDay News) — When applied to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), commercially available handheld electro-shockers pose a relevant risk for interaction, according to a study published online April 9 in HeartRhythm<\/em>.<\/p>\n Felix K. Wegner, M.D., from University Hospital Munster in Germany, and colleagues examined the effects of handheld electro-shockers on CIEDs. Six pacemakers (PMs) and 10 implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) from different manufacturers were implanted in a subcutaneous and submuscular location in an isolated section of a porcine chest and were connected to an interactive heart simulator. Three electro-shockers with varying voltage (PowerMax [500,000 V]; Electric Guard [250,000 V]; Bikenda [<50,000 V]) were applied to the porcine chest successively.<\/p>\n The researchers found that during testing, there was no damage to any of the PMs or ICDs. The highest rate of interaction subcutaneously was documented with the PowerMax electro-shocker; all 16 devices inhibited stimulation during electro-shock application and six of 10 ICDs stored a ventricular high-rate episode. Inhibition of stimulation was seen in 10 of 16 devices with application of the Electric Guard electro-shocker, while one of the ICDs had a stored ventricular high-rate episode. The lowest rate of oversensing was seen with the Bikenda electro-shocker, with inhibition of stimulation in two devices; none of the 10 ICDs had storage of a ventricular high-rate episode. No relevant difference was seen between subcutaneous and submuscular placement of the device.<\/p>\n “The risk of interaction is primarily dependent on applied voltage, but resulting changes in cardiac device behavior differ according to the respective manufacturer,” the authors write.<\/p>\n