Feasibility of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with an Implantable Loop Recorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The implantable loop recorder (ILR) is a useful tool in the diagnosis of syncope. Our understanding of their functional and safety profile in interfering environments such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) becomes increasingly important as they become more prevalent. METHODS: We report four patients with an ILR who underwent MRI. The ILR memory was cleared before MRI and no changes were made to programmed settings. Device interrogation took place immediately after the scan. Patients were surveyed for device movement and heating, in addition to cardiopulmonary symptoms after their MRI. RESULTS: Following MRI scanning, all patients were asymptomatic and no device movement or heating was observed. In addition, the functionality of the device remained unaffected. Artifacts mimicking arrhythmias were seen in all ILR patients regardless of the type of MRI scan. CONCLUSIONS: MRI scanning of ILR patients can be performed without harm to patient or device, but artifacts that could be mistaken for a tachyarrhythmia are seen frequently.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".