Tricuspid Valve Replacement in a Patient with a Leadless Cardiac Pacemaker: Current Guidelines and Recommendations for Perioperative Management.

Q3 Medicine
Case Reports in Anesthesiology Pub Date : 2021-07-01 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2021/5559830
River Hames, J W Awori Hayanga, Diane Schmidt-Krings, Timothy Goldhardt, John Bozek, Donald Siddoway, Stanley Schmidt, John Lobban, Heather K Hayanga
{"title":"Tricuspid Valve Replacement in a Patient with a Leadless Cardiac Pacemaker: Current Guidelines and Recommendations for Perioperative Management.","authors":"River Hames,&nbsp;J W Awori Hayanga,&nbsp;Diane Schmidt-Krings,&nbsp;Timothy Goldhardt,&nbsp;John Bozek,&nbsp;Donald Siddoway,&nbsp;Stanley Schmidt,&nbsp;John Lobban,&nbsp;Heather K Hayanga","doi":"10.1155/2021/5559830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Leadless cardiac pacemakers were developed to reduce complications associated with conventional transvenous pacemakers. While this technology is still relatively new, devices are increasingly being implanted. The perioperative management of patients with these devices has been underreported; we thus seek to add to the limited body of knowledge of perioperative management of patients with leadless cardiac pacemakers. An elderly female patient with a Micra VR transcatheter pacing system leadless cardiac pacemaker placed for tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome with intermittent complete heart block was scheduled for elective tricuspid valve replacement for severe tricuspid regurgitation. Pacemaker interrogation was performed several hours prior to the scheduled surgery based on the electrophysiologist's availability; the device was kept in its programmed VVIR mode, and the base rate was increased from 60 to 80 beats per minute in anticipation of the upcoming surgery. Upon preoperative evaluation, the anesthesiologist asked that the electrophysiology team be placed on standby intraoperatively due to the concern that either oversensing in the setting of pacemaker dependence and/or undesirable tachycardia from rate-responsive pacing could occur. The surgeon used monopolar electrocautery for the duration of the cardiac surgery. Despite the patient having evidence of pacemaker dependence in the intensive care unit preoperatively, no electromagnetic interference leading to oversensing nor rate modulation was detected during intraoperative electrocardiographic and intraarterial invasive monitoring. Evidence-based guidelines regarding perioperative management specifically of leadless cardiac pacemakers do not exist. As these devices become more prevalent, further evaluation will be paramount to determine whether existing guidelines for perioperative management of conventional transvenous pacemakers apply.</p>","PeriodicalId":36504,"journal":{"name":"Case Reports in Anesthesiology","volume":"2021 ","pages":"5559830"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8266474/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Case Reports in Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5559830","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Leadless cardiac pacemakers were developed to reduce complications associated with conventional transvenous pacemakers. While this technology is still relatively new, devices are increasingly being implanted. The perioperative management of patients with these devices has been underreported; we thus seek to add to the limited body of knowledge of perioperative management of patients with leadless cardiac pacemakers. An elderly female patient with a Micra VR transcatheter pacing system leadless cardiac pacemaker placed for tachycardia-bradycardia syndrome with intermittent complete heart block was scheduled for elective tricuspid valve replacement for severe tricuspid regurgitation. Pacemaker interrogation was performed several hours prior to the scheduled surgery based on the electrophysiologist's availability; the device was kept in its programmed VVIR mode, and the base rate was increased from 60 to 80 beats per minute in anticipation of the upcoming surgery. Upon preoperative evaluation, the anesthesiologist asked that the electrophysiology team be placed on standby intraoperatively due to the concern that either oversensing in the setting of pacemaker dependence and/or undesirable tachycardia from rate-responsive pacing could occur. The surgeon used monopolar electrocautery for the duration of the cardiac surgery. Despite the patient having evidence of pacemaker dependence in the intensive care unit preoperatively, no electromagnetic interference leading to oversensing nor rate modulation was detected during intraoperative electrocardiographic and intraarterial invasive monitoring. Evidence-based guidelines regarding perioperative management specifically of leadless cardiac pacemakers do not exist. As these devices become more prevalent, further evaluation will be paramount to determine whether existing guidelines for perioperative management of conventional transvenous pacemakers apply.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

无铅心脏起搏器患者的三尖瓣置换术:围手术期管理的现行指南和建议。
开发无铅心脏起搏器是为了减少与传统经静脉起搏器相关的并发症。虽然这项技术仍然相对较新,但植入的设备越来越多。使用这些装置的患者的围手术期管理一直被低估;因此,我们试图增加有限的知识体的围手术期管理的患者无铅心脏起搏器。一位老年女性患者,因心动过速-心动过缓综合征伴有间歇性完全性心脏传导阻滞,使用Micra VR经导管起搏系统无铅心脏起搏器,因严重三尖瓣返流,计划进行选择性三尖瓣置换术。根据电生理学家的时间安排,在手术前几小时进行起搏器检查;该设备保持在其编程的VVIR模式,并且预期即将进行的手术,基本频率从每分钟60次增加到每分钟80次。在术前评估时,麻醉师要求电生理小组在术中待命,因为担心在起搏器依赖的情况下过度敏感和/或心率反应性起搏可能发生不良的心动过速。外科医生在心脏手术期间使用单极电。尽管患者术前在重症监护病房有起搏器依赖的证据,但术中心电图和动脉内侵入性监测未发现电磁干扰导致过感或速率调节。关于无导线心脏起搏器围手术期管理的循证指南尚不存在。随着这些设备变得越来越普遍,进一步的评估将至关重要,以确定现有的指导方针是否适用于传统经静脉起搏器的围手术期管理。
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
Case Reports in Anesthesiology
Case Reports in Anesthesiology Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信