Exclusively cephalic venous access for cardiac resynchronisation: A prospective multi-centre evaluation.
Details
Serval ID
serval:BIB_4ED966E50EAE
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Exclusively cephalic venous access for cardiac resynchronisation: A prospective multi-centre evaluation.
Journal
Pacing and clinical electrophysiology
ISSN
1540-8159 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0147-8389
Publication state
Published
Issued date
12/2020
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
43
Number
12
Pages
1515-1520
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Multicenter Study
Publication Status: ppublish
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
Small series has shown that cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) can be achieved in a majority of patients using exclusively cephalic venous access. We sought to determine whether this method is suitable for widespread use.
A group of 19 operators including 11 trainees in three pacing centres attempted to use cephalic access alone for all CRT device implants over a period of 8 years. The access route for each lead, the procedure outcome, duration, and complications were collected prospectively. Data were also collected for 105 consecutive CRT device implants performed by experienced operators not using the exclusively cephalic method.
A new implantation of a CRT device using exclusively cephalic venous access was attempted in 1091 patients (73.6% male, aged 73 ± 12 years). Implantation was achieved using cephalic venous access alone in 801 cases (73.4%) and using a combination of cephalic and other access in a further 180 (16.5%). Cephalic access was used for 2468 of 3132 leads implanted (78.8%). Compared to a non-cephalic reference group, complications occurred less frequently (69/1091 vs 12/105; P = .0468), and there were no pneumothoraces with cephalic implants. Procedure and fluoroscopy duration were shorter (procedure duration 118 ± 45 vs 144 ± 39 minutes, P < .0001; fluoroscopy duration 15.7 ± 12.9 vs 22.8 ± 12.2 minutes, P < .0001).
CRT devices can be implanted using cephalic access alone in a substantial majority of cases. This approach is safe and efficient.
A group of 19 operators including 11 trainees in three pacing centres attempted to use cephalic access alone for all CRT device implants over a period of 8 years. The access route for each lead, the procedure outcome, duration, and complications were collected prospectively. Data were also collected for 105 consecutive CRT device implants performed by experienced operators not using the exclusively cephalic method.
A new implantation of a CRT device using exclusively cephalic venous access was attempted in 1091 patients (73.6% male, aged 73 ± 12 years). Implantation was achieved using cephalic venous access alone in 801 cases (73.4%) and using a combination of cephalic and other access in a further 180 (16.5%). Cephalic access was used for 2468 of 3132 leads implanted (78.8%). Compared to a non-cephalic reference group, complications occurred less frequently (69/1091 vs 12/105; P = .0468), and there were no pneumothoraces with cephalic implants. Procedure and fluoroscopy duration were shorter (procedure duration 118 ± 45 vs 144 ± 39 minutes, P < .0001; fluoroscopy duration 15.7 ± 12.9 vs 22.8 ± 12.2 minutes, P < .0001).
CRT devices can be implanted using cephalic access alone in a substantial majority of cases. This approach is safe and efficient.
Keywords
Aged, Axillary Vein, Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy/methods, Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices, Catheterization, Peripheral/methods, Clinical Competence, Female, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Seldinger technique, cardiac resynchronisation therapy, cephalic vein, pneumothorax, subclavian vein, venous cut down
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
03/03/2024 17:36
Last modification date
11/03/2024 7:17