ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Right ventricular pacemaker lead perforation is a rare but well documented complication of pacemaker implantation. Lead perforation can cause an array of symptoms ranging from none to hemodynamic instability and tamponade. In previously reported cases, lead perforation has always been able to be confirmed by imaging, with computed tomography (CT) scan considered to be the gold standard diagnostic imaging modality. CASE PRESENTATION: An 80-year-old male underwent uncomplicated implantation of a dual chamber pacemaker for sick sinus syndrome as an outpatient. Thirty-nine days later, the patient presented to the emergency department complaining of new-onset, left-sided, pleuritic chest pain. He was found to have unilateral hemothorax and abnormal pacemaker lead interrogation. Pacemaker lead perforation was suspected but not confirmed with imaging. Lead perforation was only identified after surgical exploration. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: This patient had multiple risk factors for pacemaker lead perforation. However, imaging, including CT scan was unable to confirm perforation. The presence of an otherwise unexplained left hemothorax strongly suggested that surgical intervention was indicated. The lead perforation was subsequently confirmed with subxiphoid exploration of the pericardial space. The mechanism of lead perforation resulting in hemothorax in this case is not straight forward, as no direct communication between the pericardial and pleural spaces was identified. However, previously described visceral pericardial self-sealing may contribute to the small pericardial accumulation described herein. CONCLUSION: This patient's presentation and clinical course underscore the importance of maintaining a high index of suspicion for pacemaker lead perforation despite a lack of confirmation with imaging.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Dofetilide is a class III antiarrhythmic drug indicated for the conversion and maintenance of normal sinus rhythm in symptomatic patients with atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter. Delay in initiation of dofetilide therapy may increase the duration of hospitalization from two nights to three nights to complete US Food and Drug Administration-required monitoring. Therefore, substantial cost savings may be associated with implementation of an institution-specific dofetilide initiation protocol in order to reduce hospitalization to two nights. This could potentially be achieved through protocol-defined utilization of the option for a condensed dosing interval for the first three doses of dofetilide in order to ensure the administration of two doses on the first day of hospitalization. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to assess the impact of an institution-specific dofetilide initiation protocol on mean hospital length of stay and cost for dofetilide initiation. METHODS: The study design was a retrospective review of 150 patients admitted to the Clement J. Zablocki Veterans Affairs Medical Center for the purpose of dofetilide initiation. Matching time periods of 18 months before and after implementation of the institution-specific dofetilide initiation protocol were used to randomly select 75 patients from each time period for comparison. RESULTS: A significant reduction in mean hospital length of stay of 0.56 nights post-implementation of the institution-specific dofetilide initiation protocol was identified (95% confidence interval 0.20-0.92; P = 0.0029). Assuming hospital adjusted expenses per inpatient day of US$1831-2413, a reduction in hospital length of stay of 0.56 nights resulted in estimated cost savings of US$1025-1351 per admission for dofetilide initiation. CONCLUSION: Implementation of an institution-specific dofetilide initiation protocol decreases mean hospital length of stay and cost for dofetilide initiation.
ABSTRACT
Ultrasound measurements, including xiphoid-to-pericardial distance and deployment angle, were made on human fetuses as a function of gestational age for the purpose of assessing the likelihood of 3 failure modes of a monolithic fetal pacemaker, including primary positioning failure due to device length and secondary dislodgement failure due to somatic growth. The small variation of the measurements over the gestational age range relevant to device implantation for the major indications of the device (for complete heart block complicated by hydrops and for bradycardia risk after fetal surgery or intrauterine intervention) predicts a small likelihood of these failure modes.