Evidence Hub

Systematic review of physical and dosimetric criteria for managing CIEDs in radiotherapy: A medical physicist's perspective

Malatesta T, Barbareschi A, Alaimo R, Mezzenga E, Brambilla MG, Delana A, Andreoli S, Consorti R et al.

Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2026

Abstract

Aim: Current radiotherapy (RT) guidelines for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) are largely based on clinical management strategies and retrospective reports. This systematic review adopts a medical physics perspective to provide a critical, quantitative analysis of the technical evidence required for developing robust safety action plans.

Materials and methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic search was conducted (January 2014-December 2024) across five major databases. Sixteen physicists from the Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica e Sanitaria (AIFM) Working Group (WG) performed a double-review and standardized data extraction, focusing on physics-specific variables for the irradiation of Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVADs), Pacemakers (PMs), and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) devices. Data were grouped into five topics: photon/electron RT, hadron therapy, modeling RT effects (Treatment Planning System [TPS]/Monte Carlo [MC]), imaging, and specific considerations regarding Magnetic Resonance Imaging Linac (MRI-Linac) systems. The Malfunction Rate (MR)-the percentage of devices with a clinically relevant malfunction-was calculated, and a Z-test was carried out to highlight safer irradiation conditions. Additionally, a narrative synthesis was performed.

Results: Of the 60 selected articles, 47 were co-authored by physicists. The studies considered a total of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free