Literature DB >> 26705557

Prevalence and predictor factors of severe venous obstruction after cardiovascular electronic device implantation.

Massimo Santini1, Stefania Angela Di Fusco2, Andrea Santini3, Barbara Magris1, Carlo Pignalberi1, Stefano Aquilani1, Furio Colivicchi, Alessio Gargaro4, Renato Pietro Ricci1.   

Abstract

AIMS: Despite not being uncommon, limited evidence exists about predisposing factors for venous obstruction in patients with implantable electronic devices. We aimed to assess the prevalence of severe venous obstruction in patients with intravenous devices and identify predictor factors. METHODS AND
RESULTS: A total of 184 patients underwent venography to detect venous obstruction associated with the inserted lead. Vessel obstruction was graded as venous occlusion (complete flow interruption), severe obstruction (narrowing >90%), or mild-moderate obstruction (narrowing 50-90%). Severe venous obstruction/occlusion prevalence was 11.4% (n = 21) and was always asymptomatic. Collateral circulation was found in 80.9% of patients with severe obstruction/occlusion. Twelve patients (6.5%) had 3 leads. The rates of patients with secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death as indication for implantable devices and of those of patients with 3 leads were significantly greater in the group with severe obstruction/occlusion than in the non-severe obstruction/occlusion group (respectively, P = 0.004 and P = 0.03). Logistic analysis adjusted for venous thromboembolic risk factors confirmed that secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death as indication for implantable devices [odds ratio (OR), 7.1; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4-35.3; P = 0.017] and the presence of 3 leads (OR, 8.5; 95% CI: 1.75-41.35; P = 0.008) were predictors of severe obstruction/occlusion.
CONCLUSION: In patients with implantable devices, severe venous obstruction prevalence is not negligible and the lack of symptoms does not exclude it. The presence of three leads and sudden cardiac death as indication for implantable devices seem to be associated with the presence of severe venous obstruction/occlusion. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author 2015. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; Pacemaker; Predictor factor; Venous obstruction

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26705557     DOI: 10.1093/europace/euv391

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Europace        ISSN: 1099-5129            Impact factor:   5.214


  9 in total

1.  Is ventricular sensing always right, when it is left?

Authors:  Mauro Biffi; Giulia de Zan; Giulia Massaro; Andrea Angeletti; Cristian Martignani; Giuseppe Boriani; Igor Diemberger; Matteo Ziacchi
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 2.882

2.  Balloon venoplasty opens the road for an implantable defibrillator patient with complex stenosis.

Authors:  Peter Magnusson; Robert Kastberg
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2017-05-16

3.  Lead failure in transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator: a new opportunity for an effective management.

Authors:  Carlo Pignalberi; Furio Colivicchi
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2018-07-07

4.  Incidence, predictors, and gradation of upper extremity venous obstruction after transvenous pacemaker implantation.

Authors:  Jayaprakash Shenthar; Deepak Padmanabhan; Bharatraj Banavalikar; Javed Parvez; Sanjai Pattu Vallapil; Inaotan Singha; Vivek Tripathi
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2019-03-14

5.  Should they stay, or should they go: Do we need to remove the old cardiac implantable electronic device if a new system is required on the contralateral side?

Authors:  Willy Weng; Pascal Theriault-Lauzier; David Birnie; Calum Redpath; Mehrdad Golian; Mouhannad M Sadek; Andres Klein; F Daniel Ramirez; Darryl R Davis; Pablo B Nery; Girish M Nair; Simon Hansom; Martin S Green; Alper Aydin
Journal:  Heart Rhythm O2       Date:  2022-02-13

6.  The usefulness of balloon occlusive left ventricular lead delivery in combination with the quadripolar active fixation lead for a patient with complex coronary venous morphology.

Authors:  Shingo Sasaki; Noriyoshi Kaname; Takahiko Kinjo; Hirofumi Tomita
Journal:  J Cardiol Cases       Date:  2021-10-20

7.  Reintervention in Artificial Cardiac Pacing Systems.

Authors:  Silas Dos Santos Galvão Filho
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 8.  State of the art: leadless ventricular pacing : A national expert consensus of the Austrian Society of Cardiology.

Authors:  C Steinwender; P Lercher; C Schukro; H Blessberger; G Prenner; M Andreas; J Kraus; M Ammer; M Stühlinger
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 1.900

9.  Efficacy and safety of transvenous lead extraction using a liberal combined superior and femoral approach.

Authors:  Sing-Chien Yap; Rohit E Bhagwandien; Dominic A M J Theuns; Yunus Emre Yasar; John de Heide; Mark G Hoogendijk; Charles Kik; Tamas Szili-Torok
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 1.900

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.