Patients with pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Economic Evaluation of Anesthesiology-Led Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Service

BACKGROUND

Implementation of an anesthesiology-led cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) service can be viewed to have economic and efficiency challenges. This study evaluates the cost savings of an anesthesiology-led CIED service.

METHODS

A total of 830 patients presented in the pre-implementation period from 1 March 2016 to 31 December 2017, and 1981 patients presented in the post-implementation period from 1 January 2018 to 31 October 2021. Interrupted time-series analysis for single-group comparisons was used to evaluate the cost savings resulting from reduction in operating room (OR) start delays for patients with CIEDs.

RESULTS

OR start-time delay was reduced by 10.6 min (95%CI: -20.5 to -0.83), comparing pre- to post-implementation. For an OR cost of USD 45/min, we estimated the direct cost to the department to be USD 1.68/min. The intervention translated into a total cost reduction during the intervention period of USD 250,000 (USD 18,000 to USD 470,000) per year for the institution and USD 9800 (USD 730 to USD 17,000) per year for the department. The yearly cost of employing a full-time team of CIED specialists would have been USD 135,456. The service triggered electrophysiology consultation on 13 device malfunctions.

CONCLUSIONS

An anesthesiology-led CIED service resulted in substantial cost savings, increased OR efficiency and patient safety.

Temporary Epicardial Pacing After Cardiac Surgery

Temporary epicardial pacing frequently is employed after cardiac surgery, and can have a significant impact on a patient's hemodynamics, arrhythmias, and valvulopathies. Given that anesthesiologists often are involved intimately in the initial programming and subsequent management of epicardial pacing in the operating room and intensive care unit, it is important for practitioners to have a detailed understanding of the modes, modifiable intervals, and potential complications that can occur after cardiac surgery. Because this topic has not been reviewed recently in anesthesia literature, the authors attempted to review relevant epicardial pacemaker specifics, discuss modes and parameters that apply to the perioperative period, present an algorithm for mode selection, describe the potential effects of epicardial pacing on valvulopathies and hemodynamics, and, finally, discuss some postoperative considerations.

Influence and safety of electronic apex locators in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: a systematic review

The widespread use of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices has increased concerns regarding using electronic apex locators in patients with these devices. This systematic review investigated the effects and safety of using electronic apex locators in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices.

METHODS

An electronic search in the Cochrane Library, PubMed (MEDLINE), ScienceDirect, and Scientific Electronic Library Online (Scielo) databases for relevant articles published between December 2000 and December 2018 was performed. The search strategy centered on terms related to electronic apex locators use during root canal treatment in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices.

RESULTS

Seven studies (five in vitro and two in vivo) fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this review. It was found that electronic apex locators can be used safely in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices, when general precautions are followed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the present review suggests that electronic apex locators can be used safely in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators, consultation with patients' cardiologists remains advisable.

Electromagnetic Interference with Protocolized Electrosurgery Dispersive Electrode Positioning in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Editor’s Perspective

What We Already Know about This Topic

What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Background

The goal of this study was to determine the occurrence of intraoperative electromagnetic interference from monopolar electrosurgery in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator undergoing surgery. A protocolized approach was used to position the dispersive electrode.

Methods

This was a prospective cohort study including 144 patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators undergoing surgery between May 2012 and September 2016 at an academic medical center. The primary objectives were to determine the occurrences of electromagnetic interference and clinically meaningful electromagnetic interference (interference that would have resulted in delivery of inappropriate antitachycardia therapy had the antitachycardia therapy not been programmed off) in noncardiac surgeries above the umbilicus, noncardiac surgeries at or below the umbilicus, and cardiac surgeries with the use of an underbody dispersive electrode.

Results

The risks of electromagnetic interference and clinically meaningful electromagnetic interference were 14 of 70 (20%) and 5 of 70 (7%) in above-the-umbilicus surgery, 1 of 40 (2.5%) and 0 of 40 (0%) in below-the-umbilicus surgery, and 23 of 34 (68%) and 10 of 34 (29%) in cardiac surgery. Had conservative programming strategies intended to reduce the risk of inappropriate antitachycardia therapy been employed, the occurrence of clinically meaningful electromagnetic interference would have been 2 of 70 (2.9%) in above-the-umbilicus surgery and 3 of 34 (8.8%) in cardiac surgery.

Conclusions

Despite protocolized dispersive electrode positioning, the risks of electromagnetic interference and clinically meaningful electromagnetic interference with surgery above the umbilicus were high, supporting published recommendations to suspend antitachycardia therapy whenever monopolar electrosurgery is used above the umbilicus. For surgery below the umbilicus, these risks were negligible, implying that suspending antitachycardia therapy is likely unnecessary in these patients. For cardiac surgery, the risks of electromagnetic interference and clinically meaningful electromagnetic interference with an underbody dispersive electrode were high. Conservative programming strategies would not have eliminated the risk of clinically meaningful electromagnetic interference in either noncardiac surgery above the umbilicus or cardiac surgery.

External Defibrillator Damage Associated With Attempted Synchronized Dual-Dose Cardioversion

The simultaneous use of 2 external defibrillators to administer either dual or sequential cardioversion or defibrillation for refractory cardiac arrhythmias is increasing in both the out-of-hospital and inhospital settings. Using 2 defibrillators to administer higher energy levels than can be achieved with a single defibrillator is considered off-label and is currently not part of published advanced cardiac life support guidelines. We report the first case in which the use of dual-dose cardioversion was associated with external defibrillator damage. Because defibrillator damage, especially if undetected, jeopardizes patient safety and off-label medical product use may void the manufacturer's warranty, this case should urge users to proceed with caution when contemplating this technique.

Anaesthetic consideration in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices scheduled for surgery

With advances in cardiology and cardiothoracic surgery, several newer implantable cardiac devices have become common in the surgical population. Multichamber pacemakers, implanted cardiac defibrillators and ventricular assist devices are frequent in current day practice. Many of the newer implantable cardiac electronic devices are targeted at managing heart failure. While managing such patients for non-cardiac surgeries, specific issues related to equipment characteristics and troubleshooting should be a priority for the anaesthesiologists. There is a possibility of malfunction of the devices resulting in catastrophic outcomes. Therefore, it is imperative to understand the pathophysiology, device characteristics and troubleshooting before embarking on anaesthetising patients with implantable cardiac electronic devices.

Association of Uninterrupted Oral Anticoagulation During Cardiac Device Implantation with Pocket Hematoma

PURPOSE

Implantation of permanent pacemakers (PPMs) or implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) may be complicated by the development of pocket hematomas. Current practice guidelines provide little guidance to clinicians about the preferred strategy for chronic oral anticoagulation (OAC). The purpose of this study was to examine the frequency and clinical significance of pocket hematoma among patients receiving uninterrupted OAC during cardiac device implantation.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing cardiac device implantation between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2012, at an academic teaching hospital. Medical records were reviewed for demographics, comorbidities, and medications. The primary outcome was development of pocket hematomas within 30 days of device implantation. Clinical significance was based on the need for additional intervention. Data were assessed using descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 380 patients. The median age was 68.4 years, and 56.6% were male. Cardiovascular comorbidities were common. Among 80 patients receiving uninterrupted OAC, 71.3% were taking warfarin, 11.2% rivaroxaban, and 17.5% dabigatran. The incidence of pocket hematomas for the entire cohort was 9.7%, of which 1.3% were clinically significant. Pocket hematoma occurred in 21.4% of patients continued on OAC versus 7.7% of those not anticoagulated (P = .001). Pocket hematoma was more common among those receiving ICDs than PPMs (18.5% vs 5.7%, respectively; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Continuing chronic OAC increased pocket hematoma formation but most were clinically insignificant. Pocket hematoma occurred irrespective of the oral anticoagulant drug used, but additional study is needed to determine comparative risks among the drugs.

The safety and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing cardiac rhythm device implantation: a meta-analysis

AIMS

The meta-analysis was to assess the safety and efficacy of periprocedural antithrombotic therapy and to evaluate the risk factors potentially associated with bleeding among patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic devices implantations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was performed. Anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies were assessed separately. Uninterrupted anticoagulation was associated with significant lower bleeding risk compared with heparin bridging strategy [odds ratio (OR) = 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.53, and P < 0.0001], but there was no significant difference in thromboembolic risk between these two strategies (OR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.32-2.09, and P = 0.65). The haematoma rate was significantly increased in dual antiplatelet therapy group (OR = 6.84, 95% CI 4.16-11.25, and P < 0.00001), but not in single antiplatelet therapy (OR = 1.52, 95% CI 0.93-2.46, and P = 0.09). Clopidogrel increased the risk of haematoma vs. aspirin (OR = 2.91, 95% CI 1.27-6.69, and P = 0.01). Otherwise, a lower risk of haematoma was observed in pacemaker group vs. cardiac resynchronization therapy and/or implantable cardioverter defibrillator group (OR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.82, and P = 0.0004).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggested that uninterrupted oral anticoagulation seems to be the better strategy, associated with a lower risk of bleeding complications rather than heparin bridging, and dual antiplatelet therapy carried a significant risk of bleeding whereas single antiplatelet therapy was relatively safe among patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic devices implantations. Meanwhile, cardiac resynchronization therapy and/or implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantations increase the bleeding.