应患者要求拆除植入式心律转复除颤器:临床和伦理方面的考虑。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Pace-Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-19 DOI:10.1111/pace.15057
Massimo Romanò
{"title":"应患者要求拆除植入式心律转复除颤器:临床和伦理方面的考虑。","authors":"Massimo Romanò","doi":"10.1111/pace.15057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) implantation has significantly modified the natural history of patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in various types of heart diseases. However there is a high rate of psychological distress and reduced quality of life in patients with an ICD, more evident in younger individuals. The ICD removal upon patient request is a very rare event and causes many clinical and ethical issues.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The article discusses the case of a young patient affected by hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy, who underwent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation as a primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Two years after the implantation, the patient repeatedly requested removal of the ICD due to of a significant and untreatable psychological device intolerance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intervention became possible only after extensive psychological evaluation, which excluded specific pathology, and the ratification of Italian law 219/2017 on informed consent and advance directives, which guarantees the patient's independent decisions on current and future medical treatment. The explantation was performed 7 years after the implant. The patient is alive and in good health.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The paper debates the issues related to establishing a patient-physician relationship based on respect for the patient's autonomy and experience of illness, in reference to principles such as beneficence and non-maleficence, and the conflicts that sometimes arise between them. If a paternalistic approach in the patient-physician relationship evolves into a patient-centered model, it is more certain that the patient's choice is realistically known and shared, and that it is consistent with the patient's values and life goals. The shared decision making (SDM) process and the use of pathology-specific decision aids are able to transform the informed consent tool, usually related to medical-legal issues, into an aid for true partnership between the patient and the medical care team.</p>","PeriodicalId":54653,"journal":{"name":"Pace-Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implantable cardioverter defibrillator explantation upon patient request: Clinical and ethical considerations.\",\"authors\":\"Massimo Romanò\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/pace.15057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) implantation has significantly modified the natural history of patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in various types of heart diseases. However there is a high rate of psychological distress and reduced quality of life in patients with an ICD, more evident in younger individuals. The ICD removal upon patient request is a very rare event and causes many clinical and ethical issues.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The article discusses the case of a young patient affected by hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy, who underwent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation as a primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Two years after the implantation, the patient repeatedly requested removal of the ICD due to of a significant and untreatable psychological device intolerance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intervention became possible only after extensive psychological evaluation, which excluded specific pathology, and the ratification of Italian law 219/2017 on informed consent and advance directives, which guarantees the patient's independent decisions on current and future medical treatment. The explantation was performed 7 years after the implant. The patient is alive and in good health.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The paper debates the issues related to establishing a patient-physician relationship based on respect for the patient's autonomy and experience of illness, in reference to principles such as beneficence and non-maleficence, and the conflicts that sometimes arise between them. If a paternalistic approach in the patient-physician relationship evolves into a patient-centered model, it is more certain that the patient's choice is realistically known and shared, and that it is consistent with the patient's values and life goals. The shared decision making (SDM) process and the use of pathology-specific decision aids are able to transform the informed consent tool, usually related to medical-legal issues, into an aid for true partnership between the patient and the medical care team.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54653,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pace-Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pace-Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.15057\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pace-Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.15057","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)的植入极大地改变了各类心脏病心源性猝死(SCD)高风险患者的自然病史。然而,ICD 患者的心理压力和生活质量下降的比例很高,这在年轻人中更为明显。应患者要求摘除 ICD 的情况非常罕见,并引发了许多临床和伦理问题:本文讨论了一名患有肥厚型梗阻性心肌病的年轻患者的病例,该患者接受了植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)植入手术,作为心脏性猝死(SCD)的一级预防措施。植入两年后,患者多次要求移除 ICD,原因是对设备产生了严重的心理不耐受,且无法治疗:结果:在进行了广泛的心理评估(排除了特定病症),并批准了意大利第 219/2017 号关于知情同意和预先指示的法律(该法律保证了患者对当前和未来医疗的独立决定权)后,才有可能进行干预。移植手术在植入 7 年后进行。患者目前健在,健康状况良好:本文讨论了在尊重患者自主权和疾病体验的基础上建立医患关系的相关问题,涉及到 "有利 "和 "无利 "等原则,以及它们之间有时会产生的冲突。如果医患关系中的家长式方法演变为以患者为中心的模式,那么患者的选择就更有可能被现实地了解和共享,并与患者的价值观和生活目标相一致。共同决策(SDM)流程和病理学专用决策辅助工具的使用,能够将通常与医疗法律问题相关的知情同意工具转变为病人与医疗团队之间真正合作的辅助工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator explantation upon patient request: Clinical and ethical considerations.

Background: Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) implantation has significantly modified the natural history of patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in various types of heart diseases. However there is a high rate of psychological distress and reduced quality of life in patients with an ICD, more evident in younger individuals. The ICD removal upon patient request is a very rare event and causes many clinical and ethical issues.

Methods: The article discusses the case of a young patient affected by hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy, who underwent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation as a primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Two years after the implantation, the patient repeatedly requested removal of the ICD due to of a significant and untreatable psychological device intolerance.

Results: Intervention became possible only after extensive psychological evaluation, which excluded specific pathology, and the ratification of Italian law 219/2017 on informed consent and advance directives, which guarantees the patient's independent decisions on current and future medical treatment. The explantation was performed 7 years after the implant. The patient is alive and in good health.

Conclusions: The paper debates the issues related to establishing a patient-physician relationship based on respect for the patient's autonomy and experience of illness, in reference to principles such as beneficence and non-maleficence, and the conflicts that sometimes arise between them. If a paternalistic approach in the patient-physician relationship evolves into a patient-centered model, it is more certain that the patient's choice is realistically known and shared, and that it is consistent with the patient's values and life goals. The shared decision making (SDM) process and the use of pathology-specific decision aids are able to transform the informed consent tool, usually related to medical-legal issues, into an aid for true partnership between the patient and the medical care team.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pace-Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Pace-Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
209
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology (PACE) is the foremost peer-reviewed journal in the field of pacing and implantable cardioversion defibrillation, publishing over 50% of all English language articles in its field, featuring original, review, and didactic papers, and case reports related to daily practice. Articles also include editorials, book reviews, Musings on humane topics relevant to medical practice, electrophysiology (EP) rounds, device rounds, and information concerning the quality of devices used in the practice of the specialty.
×
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