Implantation of Biventricular Cardiac Devices Using a Double Venous Approach — An Alternative Implantation Technique

Șoșdean, Raluca; Pescariu, S; Enache, B; Macarie, Ri; Marca, Raluca

doi:10.2478/amma-2014-0013

Abstract

Background: A standard technique regarding venous approach for implantation of biventricular cardiac electrical devices used for cardiac resynchronization therapy implementation has not yet been established. We analyzed the safety and efficiency of implanting these devices using a double venous approach (cephalic and subclavian) by comparing it with the simple approaches, in order to overcome some of their inconvenients.

Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed all 228 resynchronization patients implanted at the Timișoara Institute of Cardiovascular Medicine between January 1st, 2000 and January 1st, 2013. The 204 patients successfully implanted with biventricular pacemakers or defibrillators were divided according to the implantation techniques, and compared by complication rates and values of acute stimulationdetection thresholds. Group A featured a subclavian approach (48 patients), group B a cephalic approach (81 patients) and group C a double venous approach (76 patients).

Results: Adjusting for age, sex and device type there is no evidence in the data that complication rates are significantly different when using the different techniques: 6 complications (12.5%) in group A, 8 (9.87%) in group B and 5 (6.75%) in group C (p = 0.51). A slight downward trend was observed by using double venous approach. Values of acute stimulation-detection thresholds had no statistically significant differences neither (p = 0.36). Cephalic vein was of high quality in 59.8% of cases.

Conclusions: Subclavian and cephalic double venous approach implantation technique for biventricular devices proved to be feasible and at least as safe as single venous approach using subclavian or cephalic vein alone, and it can be used as a first resort technique.

References

1. Abraham WT, Fisher WG, Smith AL, et al. Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1845-1853.10.1056/NEJMoa01316812063368
Search in Google Scholar
2. Ghio S, Freemantle M, Scelsi L, et al. Long term left ventricular reverse remodeling with cardiac resynchronization therapy: results from the CARE- HF trial. Eur Heart J. 2009;22:480- 488.
Search in Google Scholar
3. Rossi A, Rossi G, Piacenti M et al. The current role of cardiac resynchronization therapy in reducing mortality and hospitalization in heart failure patients: a meta- analysis from clinical trials. Heart Vessels. 2008;23:217-223.10.1007/s00380-008-1039-818649051
Search in Google Scholar
4. Linde C, Ellenbogen K, McAlister FA. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT): Clinical trials, guidelines, and target populations. Heart Rhythm. 2012:9:S3-S12.10.1016/j.hrthm.2012.04.02622521934
Search in Google Scholar
5. Ellenbogen KA, Kay GN, Lau CP, Wilkoff BL. Clinical Cardiac Pacing, Defi brillation, and Resynchronization Therapy. Fourth edition. Elsevier Saunders 2011, pp. 468, 530.
Search in Google Scholar
6. Yu CM, Hayes DL, Auricchio A. Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy. Second Edition. Blackwell Futura, 2008, pp. 198-199.10.1002/9781444300246
Search in Google Scholar
7. Magney JE, Flynn DM, Persons JA, et al. Anatomical mechanisms explaining damage to pacemaker leads, defi brillator leads, and failure of central venous catheters adjacent to the sternoclavicular joint. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1993;16:373-376.10.1111/j.1540-8159.1993.tb01607.x7681196
Search in Google Scholar
8. Magney JE, Staplin DH, Flynn DM, Hunter DW. A new approach to percutaneous subclavian venipuncture to avoid lead fracture or central venous catheter occlusion. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1993;16:2133-2142.10.1111/j.1540-8159.1993.tb01018.x7505926
Search in Google Scholar
9. Dickstein K, Vardas E, Auricchio A, et al. 2010 Focused Update of ESC Guidelines on device therapy in heart failure. An update of the 2008 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure and the 2007 ESC guidelines for cardiac and resynchronization therapy. European Heart Journal. 2010;31:2677-2687.
Search in Google Scholar
10. Tse HF, Lau CP, Leung SK. A cephalic vein cutdown and venography technique to facilitate pacemaker and defi brillator lead implantation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2001;24(4 Pt 1):469-73.10.1046/j.1460-9592.2001.00469.x11341084
Search in Google Scholar
11. Calkins H, Ramza BM, Brinker J et al. Prospective randomized comparison of the safety and effectiveness of placement of endocardial pacemaker and defi brillator leads using the extrathoracic subclavian vein guided by contrast venography versus the cephalic approach. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2001;24(4 Pt 1):456-64.10.1046/j.1460-9592.2001.00456.x11341082
Search in Google Scholar
12. Romeyer-Bouchard C, Da Costa A, Abdellaoui L, et al. Simplifi ed cardiac resynchronization implantation technique involving right acces and a triple- guide/single introducer approach. Heart Rhythm. 2005;2(7):714-9.10.1016/j.hrthm.2005.04.00515992727
Search in Google Scholar
13. Ussen B, Dhillon PS, Anderson L, et al. Safety and feasibility of cephalic venous acces for cardiac resynchronization device implantation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011;34(3):365-9.10.1111/j.1540-8159.2010.02975.x21091741
Search in Google Scholar
14. Haug B, Kjelsberg K, Lappega°rd KT. Pacemaker implantation in small hospitals: complication rates comparable to larger centres. Europace. 2011;13:1580-1586.10.1093/europace/eur162319858521712283
Search in Google Scholar
15. Ellery SM, Paul VE. Complications of biventricular pacing. European Heart Journal Supplements. 2004;6(Supplement D):D117-D121.10.1016/j.ehjsup.2004.05.021
Search in Google Scholar
16. Ellenbogen KA, Wood MA. Cardiac Pacing and ICDs, fi fth edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008, pp. 245-262
Search in Google Scholar

Implantation of Biventricular Cardiac Devices Using a Double Venous Approach — An Alternative Implantation Technique

Abstract

Paradigm

My account