Literature DB >> 28491695

Successful totally thoracoscopic management of a superior vena cava perforation with a pacemaker lead.

Alexander Bogachev-Prokophiev1, Ravil Sharifulin1, Dmitry Elesin1, Sergey Zheleznev1, Alexey Pivkin1, Alexander Karaskov1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac perforation; Lead complications; Minimally invasive surgery; Pacemaker; Thoracoscopic approach

Year:  2016        PMID: 28491695      PMCID: PMC5419831          DOI: 10.1016/j.hrcr.2016.02.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HeartRhythm Case Rep        ISSN: 2214-0271


× No keyword cloud information.
After pacemaker implantation, acute heart perforations can be asymptomatic when they have an atypical location. Computed tomography is useful for identification of such complications. Heart perforations by a pacemaker lead can be successfully managed by using a totally thoracoscopic approach in hemodynamically stable patients. The hybrid approach allows simultaneous repair of the heart structure perforation and correction of the pacemaker lead displacement with physiological pacing recovery.

Introduction

Heart perforation after pacemaker implantation is a rare but life-threatening complication. The number of pacemaker and defibrillator implantations is increasing annually; thus, the rate of heart perforation–related complications will become more frequent in the future. We report a case of totally thoracoscopic management of a superior vena cava perforation with a pacemaker lead.

Case report

An 83-year-old man was an emergency referral to our institute from the heart rhythm department of another clinic. Fifteen days prior, he underwent atrioventricular pacemaker implantation (Medtronic Sensia DR; Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, MN) because of sick sinus syndrome with active fixation of an atrial lead (Flextend 2, Model 4096; Boston Scientific, St Paul, MN) and passive fixation of a ventricular lead (Fineline II, Model 4457; Boston Scientific). The following day, the pacemaker control presented abnormal sensing and pacing parameters of the atrial lead; thus, repositioning of the lead was performed. Four days later, repositioning of both leads was required. Subsequently, the patient’s condition became stable, but he had a subfebrile temperature. Antibiotic therapy was performed without effect. Chest x-ray and transthoracic echocardiography showed right-side hemothorax. Pleural puncture was performed and 1000 mL of hemorrhagic liquid was removed. On the same day, the patient was emergently transferred to our clinic. On admission, the patient was hemodynamically stable. The pacemaker control presented normal sensing and pacing parameters of the ventricular lead and loss of atrium capture during maximum output pacing and diaphragm stimulation. Transthoracic echocardiography revealed insignificant pericardial effusion and right hemothorax up to 10.0 cm. Computed tomography revealed atrial lead migration into the right pleural cavity with right hemothorax (Figure 1). During the pleural puncture, an additional 600 mL of hemorrhagic liquid was removed. The case was discussed by a multidisciplinary team that included a cardiac surgeon, an electrophysiologist, and an anesthetist. Considering the signs of continued bleeding, the patient was taken to the hybrid operating room. The right thoracoscopiс approach with single-lung ventilation was performed. The 10-mm port for the camera was inserted in the fourth intercostal space on the anterior axillary line. Furthermore, 2 5-mm ports for the endoscopic instruments were used (in the third and fifth intercostal spaces anterior to the anterior axillary line). Carbon dioxide was insufflated into the pleural cavity during the operation. Simultaneously, the electrophysiology team opened the pacemaker pocket in the left subclavian region.
Figure 1

Computed tomographic 3-dimensional reconstruction scan showing the atrial lead migration into the right pleural cavity. LA = left anterior; RP = right posterior.

The perforation was found to be located in the extrapericardial part of the superior vena cava (site of connection with the innominate vein), along with pacemaker lead migration into the right pleural cavity but without active bleeding (Figure 2A and B). The pericardium was opened, and no evidence of hemopericardium was found. A purse-string suture was placed around the vena cava perforation using 4/0 polypropylene (Premilene; B. Braun Melsungen AG, Melsungen, Germany; Figure 2C). The lead was removed under visual control, and the suture was tied. Then, a new atrial lead (Medtronic CapSureFix Novus, 5076; Medtronic Inc) was implanted, under fluoroscopic control, to the lateral wall of the right atrium with active fixation. Normal sensing and pacing parameters were achieved. The atrial pacing threshold and impedance were 0.6 V/0.5 ms and 450 ohms, respectively. The ventricular lead pacing threshold was 0.9 V/0.5 ms, and pacing impedance was 520 ohms. The control revision showed complete hemostasis. One drainage tube was placed into the pleural cavity. The patient was transported to the intensive care unit. He was extubated 3 hours later and transferred to the general ward 12 hours postoperatively. The postoperative course was uneventful. The patient was discharged 4 days after surgery in good condition and with normal functioning of the pacemaker.
Figure 2

Intraoperative photographs. A, B: Perforation of the extrapericardial part of the superior vena cava with pacemaker lead migration into the right pleural cavity. C: The suture placed around the vena cava perforation.

Discussion

Cardiac perforation by pacemaker leads is a rare complication, with an incidence of 0.3%–1%.1, 4 Perforations of the right atrium and ventricle are more common than that of the superior vena cava. These perforations frequently occur at the time of pacemaker implantation or during the first days after procedure.1, 6, 7 However, cases of delayed lead perforations have also been described in the literature.8, 9 Risk factors for lead perforation are older age, female sex, body mass index of <20 kg/m², active lead fixation, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, use of corticosteroids within 7 days, and an inexperienced operator. The clinical characteristics of cardiac perforation after pacemaker implantation vary significantly. In most cases of acute perforations, cardiac tamponade and sudden cardiac death occur. By contrast, delayed lead perforations may be asymptomatic. The patient in the present case had several risk factors, including older age, low body mass index (20.2 kg/m²), and active lead fixation. The perforation probably occurred at the time of lead repositioning. However, it was diagnosed only after 10 days because the only clinical symptom was subfebrile temperature. The unclear symptomatic nature of this perforation is explained by its atypical locus (the extrapericardial part of the superior vena cava), without pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade. The atrial lead dysfunction and the computed tomography data allowed us to establish the correct diagnosis. According to published data in the literature, the most frequently used method for lead perforation treatment is percutaneous lead extraction with transesophageal echocardiographic monitoring.5, 11 For unstable patients and difficult cases (lead migration from the pericardium, injury to other organs, etc), open surgery is performed. Hussain et al presented a case of successful minimally invasive, robotically assisted repair of a right atrium perforation. Another alternative method is to use a thoracoscopic approach. We have extensive experience with totally thoracoscopic epicardial atrial fibrillation ablation and thoracoscopic pericardiectomy in patients with pericarditis. This experience enabled us to use an endoscopic approach for lead perforation management. In comparison with percutaneous lead extraction, thoracoscopy allows the repair of perforations under visual control while preventing possible complications (continuous bleeding with development of cardiac tamponade). Both thoracoscopy and the conventional approach provide excellent visualization. However, avoiding sternotomy decreases the frequency of wound infection complications, length of mechanical ventilation, duration of intensive care unit and hospital stay, and pain intensity, which is especially important in elderly patients. Moreover, in comparison with the robotic-assisted surgery, thoracoscopy is a more accessible and reproducible method with significant economic benefit. Operating in a hybrid operating room makes it possible to eliminate life-threatening complications and simultaneously reposition or reimplant the lead with physiological pacing recovery. The patient in this case was hemodynamically stable; therefore, the thoracoscopic approach was chosen. In urgent situations, a sternotomy is the preferred approach because it can be performed in the shortest time and allows repair of heart perforations in any location. Moreover, in patients who are hemodynamically unstable, carbon dioxide insufflation into the pleural cavity during the thoracoscopic approach is contraindicated because of significant mediastinum dislocation and hemodynamic disorders.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this case demonstrates that the totally thoracoscopic approach is a feasible option for lead perforation treatment in clinics with elective thoracoscopic cardiac surgery experience.
KEY TEACHING POINTS

After pacemaker implantation, acute heart perforations can be asymptomatic when they have an atypical location. Computed tomography is useful for identification of such complications.

Heart perforations by a pacemaker lead can be successfully managed by using a totally thoracoscopic approach in hemodynamically stable patients.

The hybrid approach allows simultaneous repair of the heart structure perforation and correction of the pacemaker lead displacement with physiological pacing recovery.

  12 in total

1.  Minimally invasive robotically assisted repair of atrial perforation from a pacemaker lead.

Authors:  Sara Hussain; Corey Adams; Alexis Mechulan; Peter Leong-Sit; Bob Kiaii
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2012-02-27       Impact factor: 2.547

2.  Perforation by permanent pacemaker lead: how late can they occur?

Authors:  Md Azizul Haque; Suvanan Roy; Bhabatosh Biswas
Journal:  Cardiol J       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.737

Review 3.  Delayed perforation of the right ventricle as a complication of permanent cardiac pacing - is following the guidelines always the right choice? Non-standard treatment - a case report and literature review.

Authors:  Anna Rydlewska; Barbara Małecka; Andrzej Zabek; Piotr Klimeczek; Jacek Lelakowski; Mieczysław Pasowicz; Marek Czajkowski; Andrzej Kutarski
Journal:  Kardiol Pol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.108

Review 4.  Delayed lead perforation: a disturbing trend.

Authors:  Mohammed N Khan; George Joseph; Yaariv Khaykin; Khaled M Ziada; Bruce L Wilkoff
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.976

5.  2013 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy: the Task Force on cardiac pacing and resynchronization therapy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA).

Authors:  Michele Brignole; Angelo Auricchio; Gonzalo Baron-Esquivias; Pierre Bordachar; Giuseppe Boriani; Ole-A Breithardt; John Cleland; Jean-Claude Deharo; Victoria Delgado; Perry M Elliott; Bulent Gorenek; Carsten W Israel; Christophe Leclercq; Cecilia Linde; Lluís Mont; Luigi Padeletti; Richard Sutton; Panos E Vardas; Jose Luis Zamorano; Stephan Achenbach; Helmut Baumgartner; Jeroen J Bax; Héctor Bueno; Veronica Dean; Christi Deaton; Cetin Erol; Robert Fagard; Roberto Ferrari; David Hasdai; Arno W Hoes; Paulus Kirchhof; Juhani Knuuti; Philippe Kolh; Patrizio Lancellotti; Ales Linhart; Petros Nihoyannopoulos; Massimo F Piepoli; Piotr Ponikowski; Per Anton Sirnes; Juan Luis Tamargo; Michal Tendera; Adam Torbicki; William Wijns; Stephan Windecker; Paulus Kirchhof; Carina Blomstrom-Lundqvist; Luigi P Badano; Farid Aliyev; Dietmar Bänsch; Helmut Baumgartner; Walid Bsata; Peter Buser; Philippe Charron; Jean-Claude Daubert; Dan Dobreanu; Svein Faerestrand; David Hasdai; Arno W Hoes; Jean-Yves Le Heuzey; Hercules Mavrakis; Theresa McDonagh; Jose Luis Merino; Mostapha M Nawar; Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Burkert Pieske; Lidija Poposka; Frank Ruschitzka; Michal Tendera; Isabelle C Van Gelder; Carol M Wilson
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 29.983

6.  Risk factors for lead complications in cardiac pacing: a population-based cohort study of 28,860 Danish patients.

Authors:  Rikke Esberg Kirkfeldt; Jens Brock Johansen; Ellen Aagaard Nohr; Mogens Moller; Per Arnsbo; Jens Cosedis Nielsen
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 6.343

7.  Prevalence and characterization of asymptomatic pacemaker and ICD lead perforation on CT.

Authors:  David A Hirschl; Vineet R Jain; Hugo Spindola-Franco; Jay N Gross; Linda B Haramati
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.976

8.  Incidence and predictors of cardiac perforation after permanent pacemaker placement.

Authors:  Srijoy Mahapatra; Kevin A Bybee; T Jared Bunch; Raul E Espinosa; Lawrence J Sinak; Michael D McGoon; David L Hayes
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 6.343

9.  Subacute presentation of right ventricular perforation after pacemaker implantation.

Authors:  Sachi Koyama; Keiichi Itatani; Shunei Kyo; Rie Aoyama; Taizo Ishiyama; Kazumasa Harada; Minoru Ono
Journal:  Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 1.520

10.  Delayed lead perforation: can we ever let the guard down?

Authors:  Venkata M Alla; Yeruva M Reddy; William Abide; Tom Hee; Claire Hunter
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2010-07-25       Impact factor: 1.866

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.