Literature DB >> 29552930

Cardiac implantable electronic device and vascular access: Strategies to overcome problems.

Mariusz Kusztal1, Krzysztof Nowak2,3.   

Abstract

For arrhythmia treatment or sudden cardiac death prevention in hemodialysis patients, there is a frequent need for placement of a cardiac implantable electronic device (pacemaker, implantable cardioverter defibrillator, or cardiac resynchronization device). Leads from a cardiac implantable electronic device can cause central vein stenosis and carry the risk of tricuspid regurgitation or contribute to infective endocarditis. In patients with end-stage kidney disease requiring vascular access and cardiac implantable electronic device, the best strategy is to create an arteriovenous fistula on the contralateral upper limb for a cardiac implantable electronic device and avoidance of central vein catheter. Fortunately, cardiac electrotherapy is moving toward miniaturization and less transvenous wires. Whenever feasible, one should avoid transvenous leads and choose alternative options such as subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator, epicardial leads, and leadless pacemaker. Based on recent reports on the leadless pacemaker/implantable cardioverter defibrillator effectiveness, in patients with rapid progression of chronic kidney disease (high risk of renal failure) or glomerular filtration rate <20 mL/min/1.73 m2, this option should be considered by the implanting cardiologist for future access protection.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AVF; CRT; CVC; ICD; Pacemaker; arteriovenous fistula; catheter; hemodialysis; subcutaneous ICD; vascular access

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29552930     DOI: 10.1177/1129729818762981

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Access        ISSN: 1129-7298            Impact factor:   2.283


  6 in total

1.  Unusual Venous Access for Device Implantation.

Authors:  Mohammed Al-Sadawi; Adam S Budzikowski
Journal:  Am J Case Rep       Date:  2019-10-08

2.  Development of Central Venous Stenosis Upon ICD Implantation in Dialysis Patients: A Non-Negligible Issue.

Authors:  Rohit J Timal; Ioannis Karalis; Jose M Montero Cabezas; Joris I Rotmans; Liselotte C R Hensen; Maurits S Buiten; Mihaly K de Bie; Lieselot van Erven; Hein Putter; Martin J Schalij; Ton J Rabelink; J Wouter Jukema
Journal:  Cardiol Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-04-14

Review 3.  Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices and native arteriovenous fistula in hemodialysis patients: novel perspectives.

Authors:  Leonardo Spatola; Rodolfo Fernando Rivera; Giacomo Mugnai
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 4.  The New Challenge for Heart Endocarditis: From Conventional Prosthesis to New Devices and Platforms for the Treatment of Structural Heart Disease.

Authors:  Francesco Nappi; Adelaide Iervolino; Sanjeet Singh Avtaar Singh
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  Impact of transvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices in chronic hemodialysis patients: a single-center, observational comparative study.

Authors:  Seonjeong Jeong; Gi Byoung Nam; Jai Won Chang; Min-Ju Kim; Youngjin Han; Tae-Won Kwon; Yong-Pil Cho
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2018-10-20       Impact factor: 2.388

6.  Chronic Kidney Disease in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Device Placement: Results of a Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Mohammad A Hossain; Firas Ajam; Hetavi Mahida; Anas Alrefaee; Swapnil Patel; Khushboo Agarwal; Marjan Alidoost; Shereen Dahab; Amy Quinlan; Michael Orange; Arman Mushtaq; Arif Asif
Journal:  J Clin Med Res       Date:  2020-03-02
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.