(S026) A Novel Method for Detecting Serious Cardiac Device Errors in Patients Receiving Radiotherapy Using Daily Pulse Checks

Publication
Article
OncologyOncology Vol 29 No 4_Suppl_1
Volume 29
Issue 4_Suppl_1

A novel method for monitoring CIEDs during radiotherapy is presented, which we report as effective, easy, and lacking adverse side effects. This simple technique is a cost-effective alternative to frequent device interrogations during the course of radiotherapy and allows for consistent daily monitoring.

Jonathan D. Grant, MD, Anne Dougherty, MD, Karimzad Kaveh, MD, Daniel R. Gomez, MD, Marc A. Rozner, PhD, MD; UT MD Anderson Cancer Center

INTRODUCTION: Little consensus exists for the proper monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in patients undergoing radiotherapy. We present data supporting a novel, easy, safe, and cost-effective method for detecting serious CIED problems arising during radiotherapy using daily heart rate (HR) monitoring.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Since all CIEDs default to pacing at 60–72 beats per minute (bpm) without rate-response function (RRF) upon detection of a serious error, we instituted the following daily posttreatment pulse check protocol in 2010. Any patient who can be safely paced at a lower set rate of 75 bpm with RRF undergoes reprogramming at his preradiation CIED interrogation. Following each fraction of radiotherapy, these patients rest for 5 minutes and then undergo a pulse check. An HR of ≥ 74 bpm verifies the absence of a serious error. Because paroxysmal ventricular contractions may permit perfused pulses that register < 74 bpm, “tapping” on the CIED ensues to simulate patient exercise. An HR increase verifies the appropriate programming and the absence of a serious error. In a patient with an HR ≤ 73 and nonresponse to the tapping maneuver, a serious error is suspected, and a CIED interrogation is performed. At the completion of radiotherapy, device interrogation is performed for all patients, with return of the CIED to the appropriate settings.

RESULTS: Between February 2010 and October 2013, a total of 36 patients with CIEDs received treatment at the proton therapy center, 29 (81%) of whom were eligible for the pulse protocol. We found four patients (14%) with five serious CIED errors, manifested as a device parameter reset. A total of 845 fractions of radiotherapy were delivered in this cohort, giving an error rate per fraction of 0.6%. All affected patients were detected by a decrease in the measured HR of ≤ 73. No additional resets were discovered on any other device at routine posttreatment interrogation. No adverse events were experienced by any patient as a result of the increased lower pace rate. In one patient with HR < 74 bpm, the “tapping maneuver” confirmed the absence of a reset and prevented an unnecessary device interrogation.

CONCLUSIONS: A novel method for monitoring CIEDs during radiotherapy is presented, which we report as effective, easy, and lacking adverse side effects. This simple technique is a cost-effective alternative to frequent device interrogations during the course of radiotherapy and allows for consistent daily monitoring.

Proceedings of the 97th Annual Meeting of the American Radium Society- americanradiumsociety.org

Articles in this issue

(P005) Ultrasensitive PSA Identifies Patients With Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer Requiring Postop Radiotherapy
(P001) Disparities in the Local Management of Breast Cancer in the United States According to Health Insurance Status
(P002) Predictors of CNS Disease in Metastatic Melanoma: Desmoplastic Subtype Associated With Higher Risk
(P003) Identification of Somatic Mutations Using Fine Needle Aspiration: Correlation With Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer
(P004) A Retrospective Study to Assess Disparities in the Utilization of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) and Proton Therapy (PT) in the Treatment of Prostate Cancer (PCa)
(S001) Tumor Control and Toxicity Outcomes for Head and Neck Cancer Patients Re-Treated With Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT)-A Fifteen-Year Experience
(S003) Weekly IGRT Volumetric Response Analysis as a Predictive Tool for Locoregional Control in Head and Neck Cancer Radiotherapy 
(S004) Combination of Radiotherapy and Cetuximab for Aggressive, High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Cancer of the Head and Neck: A Propensity Score Analysis
(S005) Radiotherapy for Carcinoma of the Hypopharynx Over Five Decades: Experience at a Single Institution
(S002) Prognostic Value of Intraradiation Treatment FDG-PET Parameters in Locally Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer
(P006) The Role of Sequential Imaging in Cervical Cancer Management
(P008) Pretreatment FDG Uptake of Nontarget Lung Tissue Correlates With Symptomatic Pneumonitis Following Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR)
(P009) Monte Carlo Dosimetry Evaluation of Lung Stereotactic Body Radiosurgery
(P010) Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Treatment of Adrenal Gland Metastasis: Toxicity, Outcomes, and Patterns of Failure
(P011) Stereotactic Radiosurgery and BRAF Inhibitor Therapy for Melanoma Brain Metastases Is Associated With Increased Risk for Radiation Necrosis
Related Videos
Barbara Smith, MD, PhD, spoke about the potential use of pegulicianine-guided breast cancer surgery based on reports from the phase 3 INSITE trial.
Patient-reported symptoms following surgery appear to improve with the use of perioperative telemonitoring, says Kelly M. Mahuron, MD.
Treatment options in the refractory setting must improve for patients with resected colorectal cancer peritoneal metastasis, says Muhammad Talha Waheed, MD.
Although immature, overall survival data from the KEYNOTE-868 trial may support the use of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with endometrial cancer.
Dostarlimab plus chemotherapy appears to yield favorable overall survival in patients with mismatch repair proficient endometrial cancer.
Some patients with large B-cell lymphoma may have to travel a great distance for an initial evaluation for CAR T-cell therapy.
Brian Slomovitz, MD, MS, FACOG discusses the use of new antibody drug conjugates for treating patients with various gynecologic cancers.
Education is essential to referring oncologists manage toxicities associated with CAR T-cell therapy for patients with large B-cell lymphoma.
There is no absolute age cutoff where CAR T cells are contraindicated for those with large B-cell lymphoma, says David L. Porter, MD.
David L. Porter, MD, emphasizes referring patients with large B-cell lymphoma early for CAR T-cell therapy consultation.
Related Content