Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Europace ; 26(6)2024 Jun 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38861398

RESUMO

AIMS: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) offer potentially distinct advantages over transvenous defibrillator systems. Recent randomized trials showed significantly lower lead failure rates than transvenous ICD. Still, S-ICDs remain associated with the risk of inappropriate shocks (IAS). While previous studies have reported varying causes of IAS, this study explores a rare cause of IAS, referred to as 'sense-B-noise.' It was recently described in case series, but its incidence has not been studied in a large cohort of S-ICD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients implanted with S-ICD models 1010, A209, and A219 between October 2009 and July 2023 across nine centres in Europe and the USA. The analysis concentrated on determining the incidence and understanding the implications of sense-B-noise events. Sense-B-noise represents a rare manifestation of distinct electrogram abnormalities within the primary and alternate sensing vectors. Data were collected from medical records, device telemetry, and manufacturer reports for investigation. This registry is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05713708). Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator devices of the 1158 patients were analysed. The median follow-up time for all patients was 46 (IQR 23-64) months. In 107 patients (9.2%) ≥1 IAS was observed during follow-up. Sense-B-noise failure was diagnosed in six (0.5 and 5.6% of all IAS) patients, in all patients, the diagnosis was made after an IAS episode. Median lead dwell time in the affected patients was 23 (2-70) months. To resolve the sense-B-noise defect, in three patients reprogramming to the secondary vector was undertaken, and two patients underwent system removal with subsequent S-ICD reimplantation due to low amplitude in the secondary vector. In one patient, the secondary vector was initially programmed, and subsequently, an S-ICD system exchange was performed due to T-wave-oversensing IAS episodes. CONCLUSION: This multicentre analysis' findings shed light on a rare but clinically highly significant adverse event in S-ICD therapy. To our knowledge, we provide the first systematic multicentre analysis investigating the incidence of sense-B-noise. Due to being difficult to diagnose and limited options for resolution, management of sense-B-noise is challenging. Complete system exchange may be the only option for some patients. Educating healthcare providers involved in S-ICD patient care is crucial for ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective management of sense-B-noise issues.


Assuntos
Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Cardioversão Elétrica , Sistema de Registros , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Incidência , Cardioversão Elétrica/instrumentação , Cardioversão Elétrica/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Falha de Equipamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Fatores de Risco
2.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol ; 30(12): 2900-2906, 2019 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31578806

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Implantable loop recorders (ILR) are predominantly implanted by cardiologists in the catheter laboratory. We developed a nurse-delivered service for the implantation of LINQ (Medtronic; Minnesota) ILRs in the outpatient setting. This study compared the safety and cost-effectiveness of the introduction of this nurse-delivered ILR service with contemporaneous physician-led procedures. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing an ILR at our institution between 1st July 2016 and 4th June 2018 were included. Data were prospectively entered into a computerized database, which was retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 475 patients underwent ILR implantation, 271 (57%) of these were implanted by physicians in the catheter laboratory and 204 (43%) by nurses in the outpatient setting. Six complications occurred in physician-implants and two in nurse-implants (P = .3). Procedural time for physician-implants (13.4 ± 8.0 minutes) and nurse-implants (14.2 ± 10.1 minutes) were comparable (P = .98). The procedural cost was estimated as £576.02 for physician-implants against £279.95 with nurse-implants, equating to a 57.3% cost reduction. In our center, the total cost of ILR implantation in the catheter laboratory by physicians was £10 513.13 p.a. vs £6661.55 p.a. with a nurse-delivered model. When overheads for running, cleaning, and maintaining were accounted for, we estimated a saving of £68 685.75 was performed by moving to a nurse-delivered model for ILR implants. Over 133 catheter laboratory and implanting physician hours were saved and utilized for other more complex procedures. CONCLUSION: ILR implantation in the outpatient setting by suitably trained nurses is safe and leads to significant financial savings.


Assuntos
Assistência Ambulatorial/economia , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Monitorização Ambulatorial/economia , Monitorização Ambulatorial/enfermagem , Papel do Profissional de Enfermagem , Papel do Médico , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/economia , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/enfermagem , Adulto , Idoso , Competência Clínica/economia , Redução de Custos , Análise Custo-Benefício , Bases de Dados Factuais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Monitorização Ambulatorial/instrumentação , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/instrumentação , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fluxo de Trabalho
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA