Literature DB >> 12765453

Utility and safety of prolonged temporary transvenous pacing using an active-fixation lead: comparison with a conventional lead.

C C de Cock1, C M C Van Campen, J A In't Veld, C A Visser.   

Abstract

Transvenous temporary pacing is associated with a substantial dislocation rate reported to range from 10 to 37%. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and utility of a recently introduced 3.5 Fr temporary pacing lead using active fixation in a consecutive series of 36 patients with prolonged (> or = 48 hours) transvenous temporary pacing (validation group). A group of 36 patients with prolonged transvenous pacing managed with a passive-fixation lead just prior to the introduction of the active-fixation lead served as a control group (reference group). Pacing related adverse events included dislocation, inappropriate pacing (i.e., two-fold or greater increase of initial pacing threshold), local infection, and thrombosis. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics or duration of pacing (5.84 +/- 2.4 days in the reference group vs 5.94 +/- 2.6 days in the validation group). Acute pacing threshold was significantly higher in the validation group as compared to the reference group (1.38 +/- 0.67 V vs. 0.7 +/- 0.21 V, P < 0.01). The dislocation rate was significantly lower in the validation group as compared to the reference group (5.5 vs 33.3%, P < 0.001). There were 11 (31%) pacing related adverse events in the validation group versus 21 (58%) in the reference group (P < 0.01). The vast majority of patients in the validation group (75%) had ambulatory temporary pacing. Thus, transvenous temporary pacing using active fixation is safe and is associated with a low dislocation rate and a reduction in pacing related adverse events.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12765453     DOI: 10.1046/j.1460-9592.2003.t01-1-00175.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol        ISSN: 0147-8389            Impact factor:   1.976


  6 in total

1.  Permanent-temporary pacemakers in the management of patients with conduction abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Derek Leong; Ali A Sovari; Ashkan Ehdaie; Tarun Chakravarty; Qiang Liu; Hasan Jilaihawi; Rajendra Makkar; Xunzhang Wang; Eugenio Cingolani; Michael Shehata
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 2.  A comprehensive scoping review on transvenous temporary pacing therapy.

Authors:  F V Y Tjong; U W de Ruijter; N E G Beurskens; R E Knops
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 3.  A Review of Temporary Permanent Pacemakers and a Comparison with Conventional Temporary Pacemakers.

Authors:  Keith Suarez; Javier E Banchs
Journal:  J Innov Card Rhythm Manag       Date:  2019-05-15

4.  The Alpha-bent and Tunneling: A Novel Technique for Fixing the Transvenous Pacer Lead during Temporary Transvenous Pacing in the Emergency Department.

Authors:  R Gunaseelan; M Sasikumar; B Nithya; G Ezhilkugan; S S Anuusha; N Balamurugan; M Vivekanadan
Journal:  J Emerg Trauma Shock       Date:  2021-12-24

5.  Rate of permanent cardiac implantable electronic device infections after active fixation temporary transvenous pacing: A nationwide Danish cohort study.

Authors:  Maria Hee Jung Park Frausing; Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Jens Brock Johansen; Ole Dan Jørgensen; Thomas Olsen; Christian Gerdes; Jens Kristensen; Mads Brix Kronborg
Journal:  Heart Rhythm O2       Date:  2021-11-18

6.  Effects of right ventricular septum or His-bundle pacing versus right ventricular apical pacing on cardiac function: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Lingfang Zhuang; Ye Mao; Liqun Wu; Wenquan Niu; Kang Chen
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 1.671

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.