Perioperatives Management von Patienten mit implantiertem Schrittmacher oder Kardioverter/Defibrillator

Perioperative Management of Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Utility of Magnet Application

With the demographic evolution of the population, patients undergoing surgery today are older and have an increasing number of sometimes complex comorbidities. Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are also getting more and more complex with very sophisticated programming algorithms. It may be generally assumed that magnet application reverts pacing to an asynchronous mode in pacemakers and disables tachycardia detection/therapy in internal cardioverter-defibrillators. However, depending on device type, manufacturer and model, the response to magnet application may differ substantially. For these reasons, perioperative management of CIED patients is getting more and more challenging. With this review article we provide an overview of optimal perioperative management of CIED patients with a detailed description of CIED response to magnet application depending on manufacturer and device-type, which may help in providing a safe perioperative management plan for the CIED patient.

Perioperative Sensor and Algorithm Programming in Patients with Implanted ICDs and Pacemakers for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Background: ICDs and pacemakers for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) are complex devices with different sensors and automatic algorithms implanted in patients with advanced cardiac diseases. Data on the perioperative management and outcome of CRT carriers undergoing surgery unrelated to the device are scarce. Methods: Data from 198 CRT device carriers (100 with active rate responsive sensor) were evaluated regarding perioperative adverse (device-related) events (A(D)E) and lead parameter changes. Results: Thirty-nine adverse observations were documented in 180 patients during preoperative interrogation, which were most often related to the left-ventricular lead and requiring intervention/reprogramming in 22 cases (12%). Anesthesia-related events occurred in 69 patients. There was no ADE for non-cardiac surgery and in pacemaker-dependent patients not programmed to an asynchronous pacing mode. Post-operative device interrogation showed significant lead parameter changes in 64/179 patients (36%) requiring reprogramming in 29 cases (16%). Conclusion: The left-ventricular pacing lead represents the most vulnerable system component. Comprehensive pre and post-interventional device interrogation is mandatory to ensure proper system function. The type of ICD function suspension has no impact on each patient’s outcome. Precautionary activity sensor deactivation is not required for non-cardiac interventions. Routine prophylactic device reprogramming to asynchronous pacing appears inessential. Most of the CRT pacemakers do not require surgery-related reprogramming.

[Anesthesia for electroconvulsive therapy]

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is an important component in the treatment of depression and schizophrenia in Germany. For this intervention patients undergo short-term general anesthesia and muscle relaxation. Before anesthesia can be carried out patients are subject to a comprehensive examination. For general anesthesia all established hypnotics can be used, but differences with respect to the success of the ECT have been described. Short-acting or reversible relaxants should be preferentially used. The risks of general anesthesia during ECT are estimated to be low but a transient hemodynamic instability of patients can occur. Treatment can be performed as an inpatient but also as an outpatient procedure.

[Cardiac implantable electronic devices : Electromagnetic interference from electrocauterization, lithotripsy and physiotherapy]

The management of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) poses a particular challenge in the peri-interventional and perioperative medical environment due to the many forms of possible electromagnetic interference. Although the devices encountered nowadays are of increasing complexity, the vast majority of procedures can be safely performed in patients. The existing position statements and recommendations, however, have a low level of evidence and are often contradictory. In the context of intraoperative electrocauterization, one of the most important sources of electromagnetic interference in the medical environment, recent studies have suggested an increasingly pragmatically perioperative CIED management, which is not represented in the existing recommendations. This article gives an example of these newer findings and reports the currently used and appropriately adapted perioperative CIED management protocol. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy was thought to cause severe interference in CIED patients based on older studies and in vitro experiments. Although electromagnetic interference is possible, clinical observations with modern devices show that the procedure can generally be safely applied in CIED patients. Physiotherapy often utilizes a variety of electromechanical devices, which can be a relevant source of electromagnetic interference. Although some of these therapies can be safely used, coordination with the responsible CIED unit is recommended.

Comparison of perioperative strategies in ICD patients: The perioperative ICD management study (PIM study)

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of patients with implanted cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and the frequency of surgery on these patients are steadily on the rise. Guidelines recommend preoperative ICD reprogramming, although this is sometimes difficult in clinical practice. Placing a magnet on the ICD is a practical alternative and even no inactivation is possible in selected cases.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, we compared different perioperative ICD management strategies depending on the location of the surgery and the type of electrocautery used. Patients undergoing surgery above the umbilicus with monopolar electrocautery had their ICD therapy inactivated by reprogramming. When surgery below the navel or surgery above the navel with bipolar electrocautery was completed, ICD inactivation was performed using a magnet. No inactivation was performed on patients undergoing lower extremity surgery with bipolar electrocautery. Only ICD patients who were not pacemaker dependent were enrolled. After surgery, the ICDs were assessed regarding documented arrhythmias and parameters.

RESULTS

Out of 101 patients included in this study, the ICD was preoperatively reprogrammed in 42 patients (41.6%), a magnet was used on 45 patients (44.5%), and ICDs were not deactivated at all in 14 patients (13.9%). No intraoperative electromagnetic interference was detected. Postoperative ICD analysis demonstrated no changes of preset parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

All three tested ICD management strategies were proved safe in this study. Keeping the location of surgery and the type of electrocautery in mind, an intraoperative magnet or even no ICD deactivation at all could be feasible alternatives in surgery on patients with ICDs.

[Pacemaker, defibrillator and co : Perioperative handling of cardiac implantable electronic devices]

The number of patients treated with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is continously increasing. Knowledge of the medical indications and technical mode of functioning of these devices is a basic prerequisite for the safe perioperative care of this patient cohort. The CIEDs are subjected to a multitude of disturbing influences in the perioperative setting. This can result in potentially dangerous complications, such as exit block and oversensing. The safe performance of interventions is possible as long as some basic rules are followed. An interdisciplinary approach involving all participating disciplines is necessary in order to adequately deal with the high demands placed on the logistics.

[Perioperative treatment of patients with long QT syndrome]

Long QT syndrome (LQTS) is caused by a change in cardiac repolarization due to functional ion channel dysfunction which is associated with an elongation of the QT interval (hence the name) in the electrocardiogram and a predisposition to cardiac rhythm disorders (e.g. torsade de pointes, TdP) as well as cardiac events up to sudden cardiac death. There is a congenital (cLQTS) and an acquired (aLQTS) form of the disease. The prevalence of cLQTS is 1 in 2000 but aLQTS is much more common and includes a grey area due to many asymptomatic patients. The LQTS is, therefore, more common than malignant hyperthermia which is much discussed in anesthesiology and has a reported prevalence in the population of 1:3000. Considering the prevalence of both aLQTS as well as cLQTS the importance of the LQTS seems to be underestimated in current perioperative care. Potential perioperative risks of such patients can be significantly reduced by appropriate patient management. This includes adequate preoperative preparation, the correct choice of anesthetic medication as well as adequate perioperative monitoring and preparedness for immediate pharmaceutical and electrical intervention in case of typical cardiac rhythm disturbances, such as TdP arrhythmia.

[Anesthesiological aspects of deep brain stimulation : special features of implementation and dealing with brain pacemaker carriers]

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) provides a very effective treatment for a number of neurological diseases including Parkinson's disease, movement disorders and epilepsy. In DBS microelectrodes are positioned in defined cerebral target areas and connected to a pacemaker. It is most often performed as an awake craniotomy with intraoperative testing. Various anesthesiological regimes are used to protect the patient from surgical stress on the one hand and to achieve ideal test conditions on the other. They include local anesthesia or scalp blocks, intermittent general anesthesia or analgosedation with or without airway protection; however, anesthetic agents interfere with hemodynamic stability and ventilation, with vigilance and cooperation and in addition with the symptoms and microelectrode recording. Guidance and communication have a pivotal impact on patient needs for pharmacological interventions. With increasing numbers of DBS procedures, anesthesiologists are more often faced with patients carrying brain pacemakers. For anesthesia the characteristics of the disease as well as the respective long-term medication have to be considered. In addition, the rules for handling patients with pacemakers need to be followed to avoid both dysfunction of the generator and tissue damage due to overheating of the electrodes.

[What must intensive care physicians know about implantable cardioverter defibrillator?]

The first implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) was implanted in the USA in 1980. After the publication of the landmark studies MADIT I and AVID (primary prevention in high risk patients and secondary prevention after sudden cardiac death) implantation rates dramatically increased worldwide. Due to the increasing number of implantations in elderly patients, intensive care units and emergency departments are confronted more often with patients with ICDs. Therefore, intensive care practitioners have to be familiar with these devices. This article summarizes the current literature and focuses on the management of emergencies and malfunction of ICDs.

[Implantation of cardioverter-defibrillators. How much anesthesia is necessary?]

Updated cardiologic guidelines constitute the background for an extended spectrum of indications for the implantation of automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillators (AICDs) and lead to an increasing number of operative implantations of AICDs. Moreover, during implantation of devices for cardiac resynchronization therapy the anesthesiologist is responsible for the most critically ill patients with the longest duration of surgery. As a result anesthesiologists face an increasing number of critically ill patients, whose management contributes to perioperative outcome. Automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillators can be implanted either during general anesthesia, local anesthesia or during a combination of local anesthesia combined with deep conscious sedation accomplished by an anesthesiologist. Besides economic aspects there is an increasing demand for anesthesia with the least cardiovascular side effects and rapid recovery in the often seriously ill patient with preexisting limitations of cardiac and pulmonary functions. Accordingly procedure and anesthesia-associated risks are reviewed and an algorithm for anesthesia management is suggested.