Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 95278

Gas pocket causing pacemaker malfunction.

A F Lasala·A Fieldman·D J Diana·C B Humphrey
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Pacemaker malfunction was attributed to the increase in impedance to current flow caused by a pocket of air separating the anodal contact plate of a unipolar generator from the overlying skin. Lack of capture was noted 20 hours after implantation. The malfunction was permanently corrected by bedside aspiration of the gas with a sterile syringe.

Explore related subjects

AirHeart BlockHumansInfantMalePacemaker, ArtificialPostoperative ComplicationsSuctionCase ReportsJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A F Lasala, A Fieldman, D J Diana, C B Humphrey. 1979. Gas pocket causing pacemaker malfunction.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.1979.tb05198.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1995

A computer simulation of the static magnetic field distribution in the human head.

Distortion of the static magnetic field inside the human head is dependent on regional tissue susceptibility variations and geometrical shape. These effects result in resonance line broadening and frequency shifts and consequently, intensity and spatial errors in both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy. To calculate the field distortion due to the susceptibility's geometry, two dimensional (2D) finite element analysis was applied to simulate the field distribution in a 2D model of the human head, placed in a uniform magnetic field. The model contains air-filled cavities and sinuses, and the remainder is treated as water. The magnetic field deviation was evaluated using gray scale plots and histograms of the magnetic field. The shifts in parts/million and broadening of the histograms correspond to the NMR of the sampled region. The field distribution of the human head was also experimentally mapped using the DANTE tagging sequence. The calculated and experimental field maps are in good agreement. Thus, geometric considerations with uniform susceptibilities are sufficient to explain most of the static magnetic field distribution in the human head.

Air↗
PubMed1995

Effect of thickness on the sealing ability of some root canal sealers.

A fluid transport model study was used to evaluate the sealing ability of five root canal sealers, AH 26, Sealapex, Ketac Endo, Roth, and Kerr EWT, and a dental bonding agent at thicknesses of 0.05 mm (thin layer) and 0.3 mm (thick layer) with 270 standard human root sections obturated with sealer combined with standard gutta-percha cylinders. AH26 and Sealapex sealed more tightly in thick layers, whereas Ketac Endo, Johnson and Johnson Bonding Agent, Roth, and Kerr EWT sealed more tightly in thin layers. In thin layers J&J Bonding sealed more tightly than any other sealer tested. In thick layers AH 26 and Sealapex sealed more tightly than Ketac Endo and J&J Bonding Agent, and these sealed more tightly than Roth and Kerr EWT. These findings indicate that the thickness of the sealer layer significantly influences the sealing of a root canal filling and that the influence of thickness varies depending on the type of sealer.

Air↗
PubMed1995

Deduction of the air w value in a therapeutic proton beam.

Utilization of air-filled ionization chambers with 60Co-based reference calibrations in proton dosimetry requires application of water to air stopping power ratios and the mean energy required to produce an ion pair (W or w). Accepted uncertainties in current w values for protons leads to a dosimetric uncertainty of 4 per cent when ionization chambers are employed to measure absorbed dose. For this reason, proton dosimetry protocols recommend the use of calorimetry as the absorbed dose standard. We used calorimetry in conjunction with an ionization chamber with 60Co reference calibrations to deduce the proton w value in the entrance region of a 250 MeV proton beam: 34.2 +/- 0.5 eV. Application of this w value, with its 1.5 per cent uncertainty, allows determination of dose in therapeutic proton beams, with uncertainties comparable to photon and electron values.

Air↗