Marie-Christine Weidauer, Enzo Knüpfer, Jörg Lottermoser, Usama Alkomi, Steffen Schoen, Carsten Wunderlich, Marian Christoph, Alexander Francke
{"title":"与锁骨下静脉穿刺相比,改良塞尔丁格技术头静脉穿刺植入心脏电子设备的安全性和效率","authors":"Marie-Christine Weidauer, Enzo Knüpfer, Jörg Lottermoser, Usama Alkomi, Steffen Schoen, Carsten Wunderlich, Marian Christoph, Alexander Francke","doi":"10.1002/clc.24327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>The establishment of venous access is one of the driving factors for complications during implantation of pacemakers and defibrillators (cardiac implantable electronic devices [CIED]). Recently, a novel approach of accessing the cephalic vein for CIED by cephalic vein puncture (CVP) using a modified Seldinger technique has been described, promising high success rates and simplified handling with steeper learning curves. In this single-center registry, we analyzed the safety and efficiency of CVP to SVP access after defining CVP as the primary access route in our center.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 229 consecutive patients receiving a CIED were included in the registry. Sixty-one patients were implanted by primary or bail-out SVP; 168 patients received primary cephalic preparation and CVP was performed when possible, using a hydrophilic transradial sheath.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Implantation of at least one lead via CVP was successful in 151 of 168 patients (90%), and implantation of all leads was possible in 122 of 168 patients (72.6%). Total implantation times and fluoroscopy times and doses did not differ between CVP and SVP implantations. Pneumothorax occurred in 0/122 patients implanted via CVP alone, but 8/107 (7.5%) patients received at least one lead via SVP.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Our data confirms high success rates of the CVP for CIED implantation. Moreover, this method can be used without significantly prolonging the total procedure time or applying fluoroscopy dose compared to the highly efficient SVP while showing lower overall complication rates.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10201,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Cardiology","volume":"47 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287195/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety and Efficiency of Cephalic Vein Puncture by Modified Seldinger Technique Compared to Subclavian Vein Puncture for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices\",\"authors\":\"Marie-Christine Weidauer, Enzo Knüpfer, Jörg Lottermoser, Usama Alkomi, Steffen Schoen, Carsten Wunderlich, Marian Christoph, Alexander Francke\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/clc.24327\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>The establishment of venous access is one of the driving factors for complications during implantation of pacemakers and defibrillators (cardiac implantable electronic devices [CIED]). Recently, a novel approach of accessing the cephalic vein for CIED by cephalic vein puncture (CVP) using a modified Seldinger technique has been described, promising high success rates and simplified handling with steeper learning curves. In this single-center registry, we analyzed the safety and efficiency of CVP to SVP access after defining CVP as the primary access route in our center.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 229 consecutive patients receiving a CIED were included in the registry. Sixty-one patients were implanted by primary or bail-out SVP; 168 patients received primary cephalic preparation and CVP was performed when possible, using a hydrophilic transradial sheath.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Implantation of at least one lead via CVP was successful in 151 of 168 patients (90%), and implantation of all leads was possible in 122 of 168 patients (72.6%). Total implantation times and fluoroscopy times and doses did not differ between CVP and SVP implantations. Pneumothorax occurred in 0/122 patients implanted via CVP alone, but 8/107 (7.5%) patients received at least one lead via SVP.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our data confirms high success rates of the CVP for CIED implantation. Moreover, this method can be used without significantly prolonging the total procedure time or applying fluoroscopy dose compared to the highly efficient SVP while showing lower overall complication rates.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Cardiology\",\"volume\":\"47 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287195/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/clc.24327\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/clc.24327","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Safety and Efficiency of Cephalic Vein Puncture by Modified Seldinger Technique Compared to Subclavian Vein Puncture for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices
Introduction
The establishment of venous access is one of the driving factors for complications during implantation of pacemakers and defibrillators (cardiac implantable electronic devices [CIED]). Recently, a novel approach of accessing the cephalic vein for CIED by cephalic vein puncture (CVP) using a modified Seldinger technique has been described, promising high success rates and simplified handling with steeper learning curves. In this single-center registry, we analyzed the safety and efficiency of CVP to SVP access after defining CVP as the primary access route in our center.
Methods
A total of 229 consecutive patients receiving a CIED were included in the registry. Sixty-one patients were implanted by primary or bail-out SVP; 168 patients received primary cephalic preparation and CVP was performed when possible, using a hydrophilic transradial sheath.
Results
Implantation of at least one lead via CVP was successful in 151 of 168 patients (90%), and implantation of all leads was possible in 122 of 168 patients (72.6%). Total implantation times and fluoroscopy times and doses did not differ between CVP and SVP implantations. Pneumothorax occurred in 0/122 patients implanted via CVP alone, but 8/107 (7.5%) patients received at least one lead via SVP.
Conclusion
Our data confirms high success rates of the CVP for CIED implantation. Moreover, this method can be used without significantly prolonging the total procedure time or applying fluoroscopy dose compared to the highly efficient SVP while showing lower overall complication rates.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Cardiology provides a fully Gold Open Access forum for the publication of original clinical research, as well as brief reviews of diagnostic and therapeutic issues in cardiovascular medicine and cardiovascular surgery.
The journal includes Clinical Investigations, Reviews, free standing editorials and commentaries, and bonus online-only content.
The journal also publishes supplements, Expert Panel Discussions, sponsored clinical Reviews, Trial Designs, and Quality and Outcomes.