Safety of bioelectrical impedance analysis in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: A systematic review.

IF 4.1
H Zweers, Z Zhao, E Noom, W Visser, I Jans, L Willems, M Verhoeven, D A Theuns, H Jager-Wittenaar
{"title":"Safety of bioelectrical impedance analysis in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: A systematic review.","authors":"H Zweers, Z Zhao, E Noom, W Visser, I Jans, L Willems, M Verhoeven, D A Theuns, H Jager-Wittenaar","doi":"10.1002/jpen.70150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bioelectrical impedance analysis is widely used in clinical settings to assess body composition, contributes to the management of various health conditions. However, for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices, such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, concerns about electromagnetic interference have led to longstanding recommendations against using bioelectrical impedance analysis. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess the available evidence regarding the safety of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) during bioelectrical impedance analysis procedures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Embase, and CINAHL for studies reporting on bioelectrical impedance analysis safety in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices. Inclusion criteria focused on human studies reporting CIED function outcomes during BIA measurements. Data on BIA frequencies, types of CIEDs and BIA, and observed electromagnetic interference effects were extracted. The quality and bias of the studies were assessed using the Oxford Levels of Evidence and ROBINS-I tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 2003 records screened, 8 studies were included, encompassing 866 BIA measurements across frequencies ranging from 5 to 500 kHz. No studies reported electromagnetic interference or adverse events affecting CIED functionality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No evidence of electromagnetic interference or adverse effects on CIED function was identified in the available studies evaluating BIA in patients with CIEDs. These findings support reconsideration of clinical recommendations that discourage BIA use in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":520701,"journal":{"name":"JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jpen.70150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Bioelectrical impedance analysis is widely used in clinical settings to assess body composition, contributes to the management of various health conditions. However, for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices, such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, concerns about electromagnetic interference have led to longstanding recommendations against using bioelectrical impedance analysis. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess the available evidence regarding the safety of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) during bioelectrical impedance analysis procedures.

Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Embase, and CINAHL for studies reporting on bioelectrical impedance analysis safety in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices. Inclusion criteria focused on human studies reporting CIED function outcomes during BIA measurements. Data on BIA frequencies, types of CIEDs and BIA, and observed electromagnetic interference effects were extracted. The quality and bias of the studies were assessed using the Oxford Levels of Evidence and ROBINS-I tools.

Results: Out of 2003 records screened, 8 studies were included, encompassing 866 BIA measurements across frequencies ranging from 5 to 500 kHz. No studies reported electromagnetic interference or adverse events affecting CIED functionality.

Conclusion: No evidence of electromagnetic interference or adverse effects on CIED function was identified in the available studies evaluating BIA in patients with CIEDs. These findings support reconsideration of clinical recommendations that discourage BIA use in this population.

心脏植入式电子装置患者生物电阻抗分析的安全性:系统综述。
背景:生物电阻抗分析广泛应用于临床环境中评估身体成分,有助于各种健康状况的管理。然而,对于心脏植入式电子设备的患者,如起搏器和植入式心律转复除颤器,由于担心电磁干扰,长期以来一直建议不要使用生物电阻抗分析。在这篇系统综述中,我们旨在评估在生物电阻抗分析过程中有关心脏植入式电子装置(cied)安全性的现有证据。方法:按照PRISMA指南,我们检索PubMed、IEEE explore、Embase和CINAHL,查找有关心脏植入式电子设备患者的生物电阻抗分析安全性的研究报告。纳入标准侧重于报告BIA测量期间CIED功能结果的人类研究。提取了BIA频率、cied和BIA类型以及观测到的电磁干扰效应数据。使用牛津证据水平和ROBINS-I工具评估研究的质量和偏倚。结果:在2003年筛选的记录中,包括8项研究,包括866个BIA测量,频率范围从5到500 kHz。没有研究报告电磁干扰或不良事件影响CIED的功能。结论:在现有的评估CIED患者BIA的研究中,没有发现电磁干扰或对CIED功能的不良影响。这些发现支持重新考虑不鼓励在这一人群中使用BIA的临床建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书