Vein Management for Cardiac Device Implantation

Feasibility of Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Vein Puncture under Valsalva Maneuver for Diagnostic and Cardiovascular Interventional Purposes: Pacemaker and Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation

Although ultrasound-guided axillary vein access (USGAVA) has proven to be a highly effective and safe method for cardiac electronic implantable device (CIED) lead placement, the collapsibility of the axillary vein (AV) during tidal breathing can lead to narrowing or complete collapse, posing a challenge for successful vein puncture and cannulation. We investigated the potential of the Valsalva maneuver (Vm) as a facilitating technique for USGAVA in this context. Out of 148 patients undergoing CIED implantation via USGAVA, 41 were asked to perform the Vm, because they were considered unsuitable for venipuncture due to a narrower AV diameter, as assessed by ultrasound (2.7 ± 1.7 mm vs. 9.1 ± 3.3 mm, p < 0.0001). Among them, 37 patients were able to perform the Vm correctly. Overall, the Vm resulted in an average increase in the AV diameter of 4.9 ± 3.4 mm (p < 0.001). USGAVA performed during the Vm was successful in 30 patients (81%), and no Vm-related complications were observed during the 30-day follow-up. In patients with unsuccessful USGAVA, the Vm resulted in a notably smaller increase in AV diameter (0.5 ± 0.3 mm vs. 6.0 ± 2.8 mm, p < 0.0001) compared to patients who achieved successful USGAVA, while performing the Vm. Therefore, the Vm is a feasible maneuver to enhance AV diameter and the success rate of USGAVA in most patients undergoing CIED implantation while maintaining safety.

Axillary vein access using ultrasound guidance, Venography or Cephalic Cutdown-What is the optimal access technique for insertion of pacing leads?

We reviewed the different approaches used for central vein access during insertion of cardiac implantable electronic devices. The benefits and hazards of each approach (cephalic vein cutdown, axillary vein cannulation using venography and ultrasound) are discussed. Each approach has its advantages and hazards that need to be considered for the individual patient and balanced against the skills of the operator. The benefits of ultrasound guided venous access in reducing radiation exposure to the patient and implanter, avoiding the need for angiographic contrast and in minimizing the risk of pneumothorax and inadvertent arterial puncture are highlighted. Trainees should be taught each approach to deal with patient variability. Ultrasound guidance should be considered as a mainstream option for most patients.

Axillary vein access for antiarrhythmic cardiac device implantation: a literature review

The current narrative review provides an update of available knowledge on venous access techniques for cardiac implantable electronic device implantation, with a focus on axillary vein puncture. Lower procedure-related and lead-related complications have been reported with extrathoracic vein puncture techniques compared with intrathoracic accesses. In particular, extrathoracic lead access through the axillary vein seems to be associated with lower complication incidence than subclavian vein puncture and higher success rate than cephalic vein cutdown. In literature, many techniques have been described for axillary vein access. The use of contrast venography-guided puncture has facilitated the diffusion of the axillary vein approach for device implantation. Venography may be particularly useful in specific demographic and clinical device implantation contexts. Ultrasound-guided or microwire-guided vascular access for lead positioning can be considered a valid alternative to venography, although current applications for axillary vein puncture need further evaluations.