Skip to content

Safety of Screening Procedures With Hand-held Metal Detectors Among Patients With Implanted Cardiac Rhythm Devices

Safety of Screening Procedures With Hand-held Metal Detectors Among Patients With Implanted Cardiac Rhythm Devices

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01369706
Enrollment
388
Registered
2011-06-09
Start date
2009-09-30
Completion date
2010-12-31
Last updated
2017-04-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Electromagnetic Interference

Keywords

electromagnetic interference, hand-held metal detector, pacemaker, cardioverter-defibrillator

Brief summary

Patients with implanted pacemaker (PM) or cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) systems are restrained in daily life by possible electromagnetic interference (EMI). Case reports suggest EMI between PM or ICD systems and hand-held metal detectors that are intensively used as part of security screening processes in e.g. airport controls. The objective was to determine the safety of screening procedures for ferrous materials with regard to possible in vivo EMI between hand-held metal detectors and PM and ICD systems.

Interventions

DEVICEHand-held metal detector

2 different hand-held metal detectors: (1) PD 140 (CEIA S.p.A., Arezzo, Italy) and (2) MH 5 (Vallon GmbH, Eningen, Germany)

Sponsors

Deutsches Herzzentrum Muenchen
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients presenting for routine pacemaker or cardioverter defibrillator control * appropriate PM/ICD function

Exclusion criteria

* atrial or ventricular sensing abnormalities that could not be avoided by reprogramming of device parameters * low battery status of the device such as elective replacement indicator (ERI) * intrinsic heart rate \> 120 beats per minute (bpm)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Electromagnetic Interferencetime during exposure to hand-held metal detector (2x 30 sec)inhibition of the pacemaker, loss of capture, inappropriate mode switch, ventricular oversensing, power-on-reset, device reprogramming or loss of function

Countries

Germany, Greece

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Hand-held Metal Detector
Exposure to two hand-held metal detectors Hand-held metal detector: 2 different hand-held metal detectors: (1) PD 140 (CEIA S.p.A., Arezzo, Italy) and (2) MH 5 (Vallon GmbH, Eningen, Germany)
388
Total388

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicHand-held Metal Detector
Age, Continuous66 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15
Region of Enrollment
Germany
317 participants
Region of Enrollment
Greece
71 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
93 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
295 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 388
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 388

Outcome results

Primary

Electromagnetic Interference

inhibition of the pacemaker, loss of capture, inappropriate mode switch, ventricular oversensing, power-on-reset, device reprogramming or loss of function

Time frame: time during exposure to hand-held metal detector (2x 30 sec)

Population: Electromagnetic interference

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Hand-held Metal DetectorElectromagnetic Interference0 participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026