Perioperative management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices.

The use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has increased significantly in recent years. Consequently, more patients with CIEDs will undergo surgery during their lifetime, and thus the involvement of anesthesiologists in the perioperative management of CIEDs is increasing. With ongoing advancements in technology, many types of CIEDs have been developed, including permanent pacemakers, leadless pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemakers/defibrillators, and implantable loop recorders. The functioning of CIEDs exposed to an electromagnetic field can be affected by electromagnetic interference, potential sources of which can be found in the operating room. Thus, to prevent potential adverse events caused by electromagnetic interference in the operating room, anesthesiologists must have knowledge of CIEDs and be able to identify each type. This review focuses on the perioperative management of patients with CIEDs, including indications for CIED implantation to determine the baseline cardiovascular status of patients; concerns associated with CIEDs before and during surgery; perioperative management of CIEDs, including magnet application and device reprogramming; and additional perioperative provisions for patients with CIEDs. As issues such as variations in programming capabilities and responses to magnet application according to device can be challenging, this review provides essential information for the safe perioperative management of patients with CIEDs.

Estratégias Percutâneas em Doenças Estruturais: Foco em Insuficiência Cardíaca Crônica / Percutaneous Strategies in Structural Heart Diseases: Focus on Chronic Heart Failure

Resumo As inovações em dispositivos ao longo das últimas décadas proporcionaram uma melhora no diagnóstico e tratamento de pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca. Essas novas ferramentas progressivamente adaptaram-se a estratégias minimamente invasivas e as opções percutâneas multiplicaram-se de forma rápida. No presente artigo revisamos as direções atuais e futuras dos dispositivos utilizados como opções adjuvantes para o diagnóstico e tratamento adjuvante na insuficiência cardíaca crônica, o seu desenvolvimento, mecanismos e estudos mais recentes

Abstract Innovations in devices during the last decade contributed to enhanced diagnosis and treatment of patients with cardiac insufficiency. These tools progressively adapted to minimally invasive strategies with rapid, widespread use. The present article focuses on actual and future directions of device-related diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure.

Patient with an implantable cardiac electrical stimulation device. What should the anesthesiologist know? / Paciente con dispositivo de estimulación eléctrica cardiaca implantable. ¿Qué debe saber el anestesiólogo?

Abstract Patients with implantable electric stimulation devices are challenging to the anesthesiologist since these cases demand a comprehensive knowledge about how the device operates, the indications for the implant and the implications that must be addressed during the perioperative period. This article is intended to provide the reader with clear and structured information so that the anesthesiologist will be able to safely deal with the situation of a patient with an implantable cardiac stimulation device, who has been programmed for emergent surgery. A search for the scientific evidence available was conducted in Pubmed / Medline, ScienceDirect, OVID, SciELO), for a non-systematic review. The incidence of the use of cardiac electric stimulation devices has been growing. Their operation is increasingly complex, and demands being constantly updated on the knowledge in the area.

Resumen El paciente portador de un dispositivo de estimulación eléctrica cardiaca implantable se convierte en un reto para el anestesiólogo debido a que implica un conocimiento integral que abarca su funcionamiento, las indicaciones que llevaron a su implante y las implicaciones que se deben abordar en el perioperatorio. Este artículo busca proporcionar al lector información clara y estructurada que le permita al anestesiólogo enfrentarse de forma segura al escenario de un paciente con un dispositivo de estimulación eléctrica cardiaca implantable programado para cirugía emergente. Se realizó una búsqueda de la evidencia científica disponible en bases de datos (Pubmed / Medline, ScienceDirect, OVID, SciELO), para una revisión no sistemática. La incidencia en el uso de dispositivos de estimulación eléctrica cardiaca viene en aumento. Su funcionamiento es cada vez más complejo lo cual implica una actualización permanente del conocimiento en esta área.

Resultados del primer registro de implante de cardiodesfibriladores y resincronizadores SAC (RENCARE) / Results of the First SAC Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Registry (RENCARE)

RESUMEN Introducción: La prevención de la muerte súbita y el tratamiento de la insuficiencia cardíaca son temas de gran importancia. Para prevenir la muerte súbita y mejorar el pronóstico de la insuficiencia cardíaca se utilizan los cardiodesfibriladores y cardioresincronizadores. Objetivos: Evaluar la cantidad y tipo de dispositivos implantados en nuestro país, así como las características de los pacientes, las complicaciones agudas y las que se presentan en el seguimiento. Material y métodos: Se realizó un estudio observacional, prospectivo, multicéntrico en centros de salud con la capacidad de implantar cardiodesfibriladores y cardioresincronizadores. Se incluyeron pacientes a los que se les realizó implante de estos dispositivos desde enero del 2016 hasta enero de 2017, con un seguimiento de 12 meses. Resultados: Se incluyeron 249 pacientes (edad promedio de 64,8 ± 13,7 años, 73,9% de sexo masculino, 72,1% con Fey < 35%). La etiología subyacente de la miocardiopatía era isquémica en el 39,8%, dilatada 26,7% y chagásica en el 11,2% de los casos. El 58% de los implantes realizados fueron cardiodesfibriladores y el 39%, cardiodesfibriladores asociados con cardioresincronizadores. El 84% de los procedimientos fueron primoimplantes. La indicación más frecuente del implante fue por prevención primaria de muerte súbita (67,9%). La tasa de complicaciones menores fue del 4,4% y no se reportaron complicaciones mayores. Conclusiones: El siguiente registro evidenció una gran proporción de implantes en pacientes con cardiopatía isquémica, la indicación principal fue por prevención primaria de muerte súbita y la tasa de complicaciones fue similar a la reportada internacionalmente.

ABSTRACT Background: Prevention of sudden death and treatment of heart failure are very important topics. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization devices are used to prevent sudden death and improve heart failure symptoms and prognosis. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the number, type of implanted devices, clinical characteristics of the patients and acute and follow-up complications. Methods: An observational, prospective, multicenter study was carried out in healthcare centers with the capacity to implant cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization devices. The study included all patients who underwent implantation of these devices from January 2016 to January 2017, with a 12-month follow-up. Results: A total of 249 patients (73.9% men) with mean age of 64.8±13.7 years, and 72.1% with ejection fraction <35%, were included in the study. The underlying cardiomyopathy etiology was ischemic in 39.8% of cases, dilated in 26.7% and chagasic in 11.2%. Fifty-eight percent of implants were implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and 39% were cardioverter-defibrillators associated with cardiac resynchronization devices. In 84% of cases, procedures were first implants. The most frequent indica-tion of implantation was for primary prevention of sudden death (67.9%). Minor complication rate was 4.4% and no major complications were reported. Conclusions: The present registry evidenced a large proportion of cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization implants in patients with ischemic heart disease. The main indication was for primary prevention of sudden death and the complication rate was similar to that reported internationally.

Supervivencia a 30 días y 1 año de pacientes con muerte súbita con posterior colocación de dispositivo cardíaco implantable en un hospital de alta complejidad / Patients with sudden cardiac death receiving an implantable cardiac device: survival at 30 days and one year

Background: The use of implantable cardiac devices in patients with sudden cardiac arrest has contributed to their survival. Aim: To determine the survival rate at 30 days and one year after hospital discharge of patients who had a cardiac arrest with subsequent placement of an implantable cardiac device. Material and Methods: Twenty-three patients older than 18 years who presented sudden extra-institutional or intra-institutional death with subsequent implantation of an implantable cardiac device and whose survival was recorded at 30 days and one year, were included. A univariate analysis was performed. Results: Eighteen patients had an extra institutional cardiac arrest. All patients were discharged alive. We could not ascertain the health status of one patient at follow-up. Twenty-one patients had a Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) of 1 at discharge. One patient died of a stroke within 30 days and one patient died due to an arrhythmic electrical storm one year later. Twenty patients survived at least one year after hospital discharge. Conclusions: Survival at 30 days and one year, was high in patients with sudden death or cardiac arrest who required intracardiac devices.

Postcardiac injury syndrome after cardiac implantable electronic device implantation.

BACKGROUND: Postcardiac injury syndrome (PCIS) is an inflammatory complication that derives from injury to the epicardium, myocardium, or endocardium. It occurs after trauma, myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, cardiac surgery, intracardiac ablation, and implantation of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED). In this study we assessed the incidence of PCIS after CIED implantation and its possible risk factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients who received CIED implantation at Heidelberg University Hospital between 2000 and 2014 were evaluated (n = 4989 patients). Clinical data including age, sex, underlying cardiac disease, type of implanted CIED, location of electrode implantation, clinical symptoms, time of symptom onset of PCIS, therapy, and outcome were extracted and analyzed. RESULTS: We identified 19 cases of PCIS in 4989 patients, yielding an incidence of 0.38%. The age of patients with PCIS ranged from 39 to 86 years. Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) as underlying cardiac disease and right atrial (RA) lead implantation had a significant association with occurrence of PCIS (p = 0.045 in DCM and p < 0.001 in RA lead implantation). Dyspnea, chest pain, dry cough, and fever were the most frequently reported symptoms in patients with PCIS. Pericardial and pleura effusion as well as elevated C­reactive protein (CRP), increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and leukocytosis were the most common findings. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest cohort evaluating the incidence of PCIS after CIED implantation. The data show that PCIS is a rare complication after CIED implantation and occurs more frequently in patients with DCM and those with RA lead implantation. Although rare and mostly benign, PCIS can lead to potentially lethal complications and physicians must be aware of its symptoms.

Evaluación hemodinámica no invasiva a largo plazo de la terapia de resincronización cardíaca endocárdica izquierda / Long-term Non-invasive Hemodynamic Evaluation of Left Endocardial Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

RESUMEN Introducción: La terapia de resincronización cardíaca presenta una tasa de un 25%-30% de pacientes "no respondedores". La resincronización endocárdica, en la que el catéter del ventrículo izquierdo se implanta en el endocardio, sería una alternativa para estos pacientes, aunque su evolución a largo plazo no ha sido investigada. Objetivos: Evaluación hemodinámica no invasiva a largo plazo de la resincronización endocárdica en respondedores clínicos. Métodos: Se incluyeron pacientes implantados según los criterios para resincronización, usando la técnica Jurdham, con más de 6 meses desde el implante. Todos eran respondedores clínicos. La respuesta hemodinámica se evaluó con un analizador de la función cardíaca, que mide los intervalos sistólicos (períodos preeyectivo y eyectivo) del ventrículo izquierdo y calcula automáticamente un índice de función sistólica y estimar la fracción de eyección (Systocor mod ÍS100). Para determinar la eficacia mecánica de la TRCe se comparó la función cardíaca durante el modo biventricular con el bloqueo completo de la rama izquierda, espontáneo o por estimulación única del ventrículo derecho; los pacientes fueron sus propios controles. Se promediaron al menos 20 latidos en cada modo de estimulación y se consideraron solo los cambios >1% con valor p < 0,01 como clínicamente relevantes y estadísticamente significativos. Resultados: Se incluyeron 17 pacientes, con mediana de seguimiento de 43 meses, rango 9 a 78 meses. La resincronización endocárdica, en comparación con la activación ventricular con BCRI, demostró que todos los pacientes acortaron el período preeyectivo en un promedio de 31 ms (15%), indicativo de disminución de la disincronía interventricular causada por el BCRI. En todos aumentó el índice de función sistólica en 0,3 (23%) y la FE en el 8,3%. En 12/17 (71%) aumentó el período eyectivo en promedio 8,7 mseg (2,9%), lo que sugiere un aumento del volumen sistólico. En todos los cambios el valor de p fue menor de 0,01. Conclusiones: La TRCe ofrece mejoría hemodinámica significativa a largo plazo, detectada por intervalos sistólicos.

ABSTRACT Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy has 25% to 30% rate of "non-responder" patients. Endocardial cardiac resynchronization therapy (eCRT), in which the left ventricular catheter is implanted in the endocardium, would be an alternative for these patients; however, its long-term outcome has not been investigated. Objectives: The aim of this study was the long-term non-invasive hemodynamic evaluation of eCRT in clinical responders. Methods: Patients implanted according to the criteria for resynchronization, using the Jurdham technique, with more than 6 months after the implant, were included in the study. All were clinical responders. The hemodynamic response was evaluated with a cardiac function analyzer, which measures the left ventricular systolic intervals (preejection and ejection periods) and automatically calculates an index of systolic function and estimates the ejection fraction (Systocor mod ÍS100). To assess the mechanical efficacy of eCRT, the cardiac function during biventricular mode was compared with left bundle branch block (LBBB), either spontaneous or by single stimulation of the right ventricle, with patients as their own controls. At least 20 beats were averaged in each stimulation mode and only changes >1% with p <0.01 were considered as clinically relevant and statistically significant. Results: Seventeen patients were included, with a median follow-up of 43 months, (9 to 78 months). Endocardial resynchronization, compared with LBBB ventricular activation, showed that all patients shortened the preejection period by an average of 31 ms (15%), indicative of decreased interventricular dyssynchrony caused by LBBB. In all patients, systolic function index increased by 0.3 (23%) and the EF by 8.3%. In 12/17 of cases (71%) the ejective period increased on average 8.7 ms (2.9%), suggesting an increase in systolic volume. In all changes p was <0.01. Conclusions: Endocardial resynchronization therapy offers significant long-term hemodynamic improvement, detected by systolic intervals.

Unscheduled Emergency Visits after Cardiac Devices Implantation: Comparison between Cardioverter Defibrillators and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices in less than one year of Follow Up / Consultas Não Programadas em Emergência após Implante de Dispositivos Cardíacos: Comparativo entre Cardiodesfibriladores e Ressincronizadores em Seguimento Inferior a 1 Ano

Abstract Background: The use of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices (CIED), such as the Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT), is increasing. The number of leads may vary according to the device. Lead placement in the left ventricle increases surgical time and may be associated with greater morbidity after hospital discharge, an event that is often confused with the underlying disease severity. Objective: To evaluate the rate of unscheduled emergency hospitalizations and death after implantable device surgery stratified by the type of device. Methods: Prospective cohort study of 199 patients submitted to cardiac device implantation. The groups were stratified according to the type of device: ICD group (n = 124) and CRT group (n = 75). Probability estimates were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method according to the outcome. A value of p < 0.05 was considered significant in the statistical analyses. Results: Most of the sample comprised male patients (71.9%), with a mean age of 61.1 ± 14.2. Left ventricular ejection fraction was similar between the groups (CRT 37.4 ± 18.1 vs. ICD 39.1 ± 17.0, p = 0.532). The rate of unscheduled visits to the emergency unit related to the device was 4.8% in the ICD group and 10.6% in the CRT group (p = 0.20). The probability of device-related survival of the variable "death" was different between the groups (p = 0.008). Conclusions: Patients after CRT implantation show a higher probability of mortality after surgery at a follow-up of less than 1 year. The rate of unscheduled hospital visits, related or not to the implant, does not differ between the groups.

Resumo Fundamento: O uso de dispositivos cardíacos eletrônicos implantáveis (DCEI) como o cardiodesfibrilador (CDI) e terapia de ressincronização cardíaca (TRC) - é cada vez maior. O número de eletrodos de estimulação e desfibrilação varia de acordo com o dispositivo. A colocação do eletrodo no ventrículo esquerdo aumenta o tempo cirúrgico podendo associar-se a maior morbidade no acompanhamento após alta hospitalar, evento muitas vezes confundível com a gravidade da patologia base. Objetivo: Avaliar a taxa de internação não programada na emergência e óbito após cirurgia de dispositivos implantáveis estratificados pelo tipo de aparelho. Métodos: Estudo de coorte prospectivo analisando 199 pacientes submetidos à implante de dispositivos cardíacos. Os grupos foram divididos de acordo com o tipo de dispositivo: CDI (n = 124) e TRC (n = 75). Estimativas de probabilidades foram analisadas pelo método de Kaplan-Meier de acordo com o desfecho. Valor de p < 0,05 foi considerado significativo nas análises estatísticas. Resultados: A maioria da amostra era do sexo masculino (71,9%) - idade média de 61,1 ± 14,2. A fração de ejeção do ventrículo esquerdo foi similar entre os grupos (TRC 37,4 ± 18,1 vs. CDI 39,1 ± 17,0; p = 0,532). A taxa de visita não programada na emergência relacionada ao dispositivo foi de 4,8% no grupo CDI e de 10,6% no grupo TRC (p = 0,20). A probabilidade de sobrevida relacionada ao dispositivo da variável "óbito" mostrou-se diferente entre os grupos (p = 0,008). Conclusões: Paciente após o implante de TRC apresenta maior probabilidade de mortalidade após o procedimento cirúrgico no seguimento menor que 1 ano. A taxa de visita hospitalar não programada, relacionadas ou não ao implante, não difere entre os grupos.

Recommendations for Perioperative Management of Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.

Four thousand cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are implanted yearly in Croatia with constant increase. General anesthesia and surgery carry some specific risk for the patients with implanted CIEDs. Since most of the surgical procedures are performed in institutions without reprogramming devices available, or in the periods when they are unavailable, these guidelines aim to standardize the protocol for perioperative management of these patients. With this protocol, most of the procedures can be performed easily and, more importantly, safely in the majority of surgical patients.

Dispositivos implantables en la insuficiencia cardíaca con fracción de eyección reducida. Más de 30 años de demostrada eficacia terapéutica / Implantable devices in reduced ejection fraction heart failure. More than 30 years of proven therapeutic efficacy

En el presente artículo se analiza el rol de los dispositivos implantables en la mejoría de síntomas y en prevención primaria de muerte súbita en pacientes con insuficiencia cardíaca con fracción de eyección reducida. No se considera la prevención secundaria, es decir, la de aquellos pacientes que ya han presentado un evento arrítmico mayor, que puede ser motivo de otro artículo. Se destaca el análisis de las recomendaciones de las Guías Europeas 2016, tanto para la resincronización cardíaca como para el implante de cardiodesfibrilador, complementado con una descripción pormenorizada de los diferentes ensayos clínicos que pretende contribuir a una correcta toma de decisiones en la práctica clínica. Al final del capítulo el lector encontrará un resumen conceptual con mensajes clave para la puesta al día del conocimiento de estas terapias complementarias del tratamiento médico óptimo.

In this article, the role of implantable devices in improvement of symptoms and primary prevention of sudden death in patients with reduced ejection fraction heart failure, is analyzed. Secondary prevention is not considered, that is, of those patients who have already presented a major arrhythmic event, which may be the reason for another article. The analysis of the recommendations of the 2016 European Guidelines is highlighted, both for cardiac resynchronization and for the implantation of cardio-defibrillators, complemented with a detailed description of the different clinical trials, which aim to correct decision-making in clinical practice. At the end of the chapter, the reader will find a conceptual summary in which key messages are considered for updating the knowledge of these complementary therapies of optimal medical treatment.

Percutaneous lead extraction in infection of cardiac implantable electronic devices: a systematic review

Abstract Introduction: In the last two decades, the increased number of implants of cardiac implantable electronic devices has been accompanied by an increase in complications, especially infection. Current recommendations for the appropriate treatment of cardiac implantable electronic devices-related infections consist of prolonged antibiotic therapy associated with complete device extraction. The purpose of this study was to analyze the importance of percutaneous extraction in the treatment of these devices infections. Methods: A systematic review search was performed in the PubMed, BVS, Cochrane CENTRAL, CAPES, SciELO and ScienceDirect databases. A total of 1,717 studies were identified and subsequently selected according to the eligibility criteria defined by relevance tests by two authors working independently. Results: Sixteen studies, describing a total of 3,354 patients, were selected. Percutaneous extraction was performed in 3,081 patients. The average success rate for the complete percutaneous removal of infected devices was 92.4%. Regarding the procedure, the incidence of major complications was 2.9%, and the incidence of minor complications was 8.4%. The average in-hospital mortality of the patients was 5.4%, and the mortality related to the procedure ranged from 0.4 to 3.6%. The mean mortality was 20% after 6 months and 14% after a one-year follow-up. Conclusion: Percutaneous extraction is the main technique for the removal of infected cardiac implantable electronic devices, and it presents low rates of complications and mortality related to the procedure.

A lost cable: «reel¼ syndrome / Un cable suelto: síndrome del «carrete¼

Abstract: Lead dislodgement syndromes (twiddler, ratchet or reel syndromes) are rare causes of cardiac stimulation device malfunction that can occur most commonly early after device implantation. In most cases, lead replacement (due to extensive damage) or reposition (due to displacement) is needed. We present a case of reel syndrome involving the left ventricular lead of a (AU)

Resumen: Los síndromes de desprendimiento de los cables (síndrome de "tweedler", trinquete o carrete) son causas raras de disfunción del dispositivo de estimulación cardiaca, que generalmente ocurren en el periodo temprano después del implante. En la mayoría de los casos, se requiere el reemplazo del cable (debido a daños extensos) o el reposicionamiento (debido al desplazamiento). Presentamos un caso de síndrome del carrete que involucra de manera exclusiva el cable ventricular izquierdo de un dispositivo de resincronización-desfibrilador cardiaco.(AU)

Perioperative management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices. / Manejo perioperatorio de los pacientes con dispositivos cardíacos electrónicos implantables.

The use of implantable cardiac devices in people of all ages is increasing, especially in the elderly population: patients with pacemakers, cardioverter-defibrillators or cardiac resynchronization therapy devices regularly present for surgery for non-cardiac causes. This review was made in order to collect and analyze the latest evidence for the proper management of implantable cardiac devices in the perioperative period. Through a detailed exploration of PubMed, Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), ClinicalKey, Cochrane (Ovid), the search software UpToDate, textbooks and patents freely available to the public on Google, we selected 33 monographs, which matched the objectives of this publication.

Trainee inexperience is associated with longer procedure times but no increase in complications for cardiac device implantation.

BACKGROUND: The "July phenomenon" describes poor patient outcomes in teaching hospitals at the beginning of a new academic year when trainees begin. Whether this phenomenon truly exists is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify whether trainee and attending inexperience is associated with cardiac electrophysiologic procedural outcomes including total procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and complications. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the available electronic records of 488 consecutive patients undergoing initial dual-chamber pacemaker (PM) or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device implantation performed at University of California, San Francisco from February 2004 through November 2011. We calculated physician's year of experience using the procedure date and the physician's job start date. Patients were stratified into two subgroups based on their device type. Procedural outcomes including procedure length, fluoroscopy time, and complications were retrieved from electronic databases. RESULTS: After multivariate analysis, fellow experience was associated with decreased procedure time (19% less procedure time/year of experience, 95% confidence interval [CI] 13%-25%, P <.001 in the PM subgroup; and 15% less procedure time/year of experience, 95% CI 7%-23%, P <.001 in the CRT subgroup). Fellow experience was associated with decreased fluoroscopy time in the CRT subgroup (19% less fluoroscopy time/experience years, 95% CI 5%-34%, P = .009). Neither fellow nor attending experience was associated with complications. CONCLUSION: Each year of fellow experience is associated with a decrease in cardiac device implantation procedure time and a decrease in fluoroscopy time during CRT implantation. No associations between fellow experience and in-hospital complications were observed.