Temporary transvenous cardiac pacing in cathlab - myocardial infarction versus other causes - differences, complications, and prognosis. Data from a single-center retrospective analysis.

Cardiology journal Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-22 DOI:10.5603/cj.95981
Tomasz Skowerski, Andrzej Kułach, Michał Kucio, Michał Majewski, Łukasz Maciejewski, Maciej Wybraniec, Zbigniew Gąsior
{"title":"Temporary transvenous cardiac pacing in cathlab - myocardial infarction versus other causes - differences, complications, and prognosis. Data from a single-center retrospective analysis.","authors":"Tomasz Skowerski, Andrzej Kułach, Michał Kucio, Michał Majewski, Łukasz Maciejewski, Maciej Wybraniec, Zbigniew Gąsior","doi":"10.5603/cj.95981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transvenous temporary cardiac pacing (TTCP) is a lifesaving procedure, but the incidence of complications and prognosis depends on the underlying cause. The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics, complications, and prognosis in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) requiring TTCP vs. patients with TTCP due to other causes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The present analysis involved 244 cases in whom TTCP was performed between 2017 and 2021 in a high-volume cathlab. All the procedures were performed by an interventional cardiologist. MI constituted 46.3% of the patients (n = 113), including 63 ST-segment elevation MI patients (55.75%). Non-MI patients (control group) consisted of patients with any cause of bradycardia requiring TTCP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Myocardial infarction patients requiring TTCP are younger and have a higher prevalence of hypertension and heart failure. The pacing lead is more frequently inserted during asystole/resuscitation, and pacing was needed for a longer time. MI patients required cardiac implantable electronic device implantation less frequently than in other causes (22% vs. 82%, p < 0.01). The incidence of TTCP complications did not differ. The incidence of in-hospital death was 6.5-fold higher in TTCP patients with MI. Logistic regression showed MI to be a strong predictor of in-hospital death (odds ratio: 8.1; 95% confidence interval: 1.3-57.9).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In-hospital mortality in MI patients requiring TTCP is 6.5-fold higher than in other patients with bradycardia. The complication rate of TTCP is similar in MI and non-MI patients. It is not TTCP but the severity of MI itself and the fact that a pacing lead is frequently implanted in asystole or during resuscitation that is responsible for the higher mortality rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":93923,"journal":{"name":"Cardiology journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11544405/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiology journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/cj.95981","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Transvenous temporary cardiac pacing (TTCP) is a lifesaving procedure, but the incidence of complications and prognosis depends on the underlying cause. The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics, complications, and prognosis in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) requiring TTCP vs. patients with TTCP due to other causes.

Methods: The present analysis involved 244 cases in whom TTCP was performed between 2017 and 2021 in a high-volume cathlab. All the procedures were performed by an interventional cardiologist. MI constituted 46.3% of the patients (n = 113), including 63 ST-segment elevation MI patients (55.75%). Non-MI patients (control group) consisted of patients with any cause of bradycardia requiring TTCP.

Results: Myocardial infarction patients requiring TTCP are younger and have a higher prevalence of hypertension and heart failure. The pacing lead is more frequently inserted during asystole/resuscitation, and pacing was needed for a longer time. MI patients required cardiac implantable electronic device implantation less frequently than in other causes (22% vs. 82%, p < 0.01). The incidence of TTCP complications did not differ. The incidence of in-hospital death was 6.5-fold higher in TTCP patients with MI. Logistic regression showed MI to be a strong predictor of in-hospital death (odds ratio: 8.1; 95% confidence interval: 1.3-57.9).

Conclusions: In-hospital mortality in MI patients requiring TTCP is 6.5-fold higher than in other patients with bradycardia. The complication rate of TTCP is similar in MI and non-MI patients. It is not TTCP but the severity of MI itself and the fact that a pacing lead is frequently implanted in asystole or during resuscitation that is responsible for the higher mortality rate.

心电图室中的临时经静脉心脏起搏--心肌梗死与其他原因--差异、并发症和预后。来自单中心回顾性分析的数据。
背景:经静脉临时心脏起搏(TTCP)是一种挽救生命的手术,但并发症的发生率和预后取决于潜在病因。本研究旨在比较需要进行经静脉临时心脏起搏(TTCP)的心肌梗死(MI)患者与因其他原因导致经静脉临时心脏起搏(TTCP)的患者的特征、并发症和预后:本分析涉及 2017 年至 2021 年期间在一家高容量导管室实施 TTCP 的 244 例患者。所有手术均由介入心脏病专家实施。心肌梗死患者占46.3%(n = 113),包括63名ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者(55.75%)。非心肌梗死患者(对照组)由任何原因导致的心动过缓患者组成,需要进行 TTCP:结果:需要 TTCP 的心肌梗死患者更年轻,高血压和心力衰竭的发病率更高。起搏导联更多地在心跳停止/复苏时插入,需要起搏的时间更长。与其他原因相比,心肌梗死患者需要植入心脏植入式电子设备的频率较低(22% 对 82%,P < 0.01)。TTCP并发症的发生率没有差异。患有心肌梗死的TTCP患者的院内死亡发生率高出6.5倍。逻辑回归显示,心肌梗死是院内死亡的有力预测因素(几率比:8.1;95% 置信区间:1.3-57.9):结论:需要 TTCP 的心肌梗死患者的院内死亡率是其他心动过缓患者的 6.5 倍。心肌梗死和非心肌梗死患者的 TTCP 并发症发生率相似。导致死亡率升高的原因不是 TTCP,而是心肌梗死本身的严重程度,以及起搏导联经常是在心跳停止或复苏期间植入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信