CAN THEY BE SAFELY SCREENED BY HAND-HELD METAL DETECTORS?
Clemens Jilek, Stelios Tzeis and Christian Kolb present their research into the safety of using hand-held metal detectors to screen passengers with implanted pacemakers or cardioverter-defibrillators
acemaker and cardioverter defibrillator systems are routinely used for the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias. Function of these cardiac rhythm devices can be impaired by electromagnetic interference from devices and systems emitting magnetic fields, such as cellular phones1
P , MP3-
players, 50/60 Hz alternating current, induction ovens, and anti-theft protection devices2,3
. Security screening at airports has
intensified over the last decade, following the 11th September 2001 attacks. Metal detectors are routinely used for detection of ferrous items on passengers. They create a magnetic field that might interfere with implanted cardiac rhythm devices. Therefore people with implanted pacemakers or cardioverter-defibrillators are routinely advised to avoid screening with metal detectors, due to the risk of possible electromagnetic interference. Is concern justified? We have previously shown that metal detector gates are safe for patients with cardiac rhythm devices4
: A total of 345 people, 200 with implanted pacemakers and 145 with implanted cardioverter-
30
defibrillators, were tested with an airport metal detector gate - CEIA’s Model 02PN10 - creating a maximal electromagnetic flux density of 42 μT. No electromagnetic interference was observed. However security protocols dictate that once metal detector gates indicate the presence of ferrous material, hand-held metal detectors should be used to verify
“
...metal detector gates are safe for patients with cardiac rhythm devices...”
and locate the suspected object of interest. The US Food and Drug Administration has reported 44 instances of possible interference between hand-held metal detectors or anti-theft protection devices and cardiac rhythm device systems5
.
The objective of our study was to systematically assess the risk of electromagnetic interference between two broadly used hand-held metal detectors and implanted pacemakers and cardioverter-defibrillators.
Download your FREE ASI "iPad/iPhone APP" NOW
Methods Patients presenting for routine follow- up of pacemaker or cardioverter- defibrillator function in two hospitals (German Heart Center Munich, Germany and Henry Dunant Hospital Athens, Greece) between September 2009 and December 2010 were screened for participation. A proper device function was obligatory before testing with hand-held metal detectors. The device parameters were changed to make interferences obvious in the connected electrocardiogram for pacemakers and cardioverter-defibrillators and to make the detection of arrhythmias more likely for cardioverter-defibrillators. Informed consent was obtained from all patients before testing for interference with the hand-held metal detectors. The study was approved by each of the local ethics committees.
Hand-held Metal Detectors We tested two commercially available hand-held metal detectors that are widely used in Europe: a PD 140 device (CEIA S.p.A., Arezzo, Italy) that is usually used at airports, and a MH 5 device (Vallon GmbH, Eningen, Germany) that is mainly used in public
December 2011 Aviationsecurityinternational
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52