Ultrasound-Guided Venous Access for Permanent Pacemaker Leads

Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture vs. cephalic vein cutdown for cardiac electronic device implantation: the ACCESS trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture (IPUS-AVP) for venous access in implantation of transvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is uncommon due to the lack of clinical evidence supporting this technique. This study investigated the efficacy and early complications of IPUS-AVP compared to the standard method using cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) for CIED implantation.

METHODS

ACCESS was an investigator-led, interventional, randomized (1:1 ratio), monocentric, controlled superiority trial. A total of 200 patients undergoing CIED implantation were randomized to IPUS-AVP (n = 101) or CVC (n = 99) as a first assigned route. The primary endpoint was the success rate of insertion of all leads using the first assigned venous access technique. The secondary endpoints were time to venous access, total procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, X-ray exposure, and complications. Complications were monitored during a follow-up period of three months after procedure.

RESULTS

IPUS-AVP was significantly superior to CVC for the primary endpoint with 100 (99.0%) vs. 86 (86.9%) procedural successes (P = .001). Cephalic vein cutdown followed by subclavian vein puncture was successful in a total of 95 (96.0%) patients, P = .21 vs. IPUS-AVP. All secondary endpoints were also significantly improved in the IPUS-AVP group with reduction in time to venous access [3.4 vs. 10.6 min, geometric mean ratio (GMR) 0.32 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.28-0.36), P < .001], total procedure duration [33.8 vs. 46.9 min, GMR 0.72 (95% CI 0.67-0.78), P < .001], fluoroscopy time [2.4 vs. 3.3 min, GMR 0.74 (95% CI 0.63-0.86), P < .001], and X-ray exposure [1083 vs. 1423 mGy.cm², GMR 0.76 (95% CI 0.62-0.93), P = .009]. There was no significant difference in complication rates between groups (P = .68).

CONCLUSIONS

IPUS-AVP is superior to CVC in terms of success rate, time to venous access, procedure duration, and radiation exposure. Complication rates were similar between the two groups. Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture should be a recommended venous access technique for CIED implantation.

Ultrasound-guided access to the axillary vein for implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The aims of our systematic review were to quantify the expected rate of procedural success, early and late complications during CIED implantation using US-guided puncture of the axillary vein and to perform a meta-analysis of those studies that compared the US technique (intervention) versus conventional techniques (control) in terms of complication rates. MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched for eligible studies. Pooled Odds Ratio (OR) and Pooled Mean Difference (PMD) for each predictor were calculated. The quality of evidence (QOE) was evaluated according to the GRADE guidelines. Thirteen studies were included a total of 2073 patients. The overall success of US-guided venipuncture for CIED implantation was 96.8%. As regards early complications, pneumothorax occurred in 0.19%, arterial puncture in 0.63%, and severe hematoma/bleeding requiring intervention in 1.1%. No cases of hemothorax, brachial plexus, or phrenic nerve injury were reported. As regards late complications, the incidence of pocket infection, venous thromboembolism, and leads dislodgement was respectively 0.4%, 0.8%, and 1.2%. In the meta-analysis (five studies), the intervention group (US-guided venipuncture) had a trend versus a lower likelihood of having a pneumothorax (0.19% vs 0.75%, p = 0.21), pocket hematoma (0.8% vs 1.7%, p = 0.32), infection (0.28% vs 1.05%, p = 0.29) than the control group, but this did not reach statistical significance. The overall QOE was low or very low. In conclusions we found that the US-guided axillary venipuncture for CIEDs implantation was associated with a low incidence of early and late complications and a steep learning curve.

Ultrasound-guided vascular access for CIED implantation: A step-by-step guide

INTRODUCTION

Vascular access is required for most cardiac electrophysiology procedures. Over the past 2 decades, ultrasound guidance has increased in utilization as the primary method for assisting operators in gaining access to cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation.

METHODS

Ultrasound guidance using a technique that includes both short-axis and long-axis views combined with a twisting needle motion after maximal tenting provides an extremely safe and reproducible technique for vascular access for all CIED procedures.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In this manuscript and accompanying videos, a step-by-step guide is explained for optimal ultrasound-guided visualization and needle maneuver technique to maximize safety and efficiency for vascular access in all CIED procedures.

Application of ultrasound-guided tumescent local anesthesia in prepectoral pacemaker implantation: A detailed procedural report

Ultrasound image-guided tumescent local analgesia (TLA) is an effective technique in prepectoral pacemaker implantation surgery. The technique provides enough analgesic effect, at the same time, the pocket creation procedures become easy because of the hydrodissection effect of TLA solution. This technique relieves patients from intra-operative pain and relieves physicians from stresses during pocket creation.

A Practical Guide to Ultrasound-guided Venous Access During Implantation of Pacemakers and Defibrillators

Ultrasound (US) guidance has been shown to be a safe and effective option for gaining access to the axillary vein during implantation of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). However, US-based technique has not been universally adopted in CIED implantations performed in cardiac electrophysiology (EP) laboratories, despite potential advantages over other vascular access techniques. For this reason, not all cardiac electrophysiologists have been trained to use US guidance during CIED implantation. This review is intended to provide a practical guide to the use of US guidance to obtain axillary vein access in the EP laboratory setting.

How to Perform Extrathoracic Venous Access for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Placement: Detailed Description of Techniques

Venous access is needed for the implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) with endocardial leads. Extrathoracic venous access in the prepectoral region has become the standard of care for CIED implantation because of lower risks for pneumothorax and likely less lead malfunction due to the subclavian crush syndrome. The most common extrathoracic venous access sites in the pectoral region are extrathoracic subclavian vein access, axillary vein access, and cephalic vein access. This review provides a detailed description of the anatomy, technical considerations, and the relative advantages and disadvantages for each of these extrathoracic venous access sites.

EHRA expert consensus statement and practical guide on optimal implantation technique for conventional pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and the Latin-American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS)

With the global increase in device implantations, there is a growing need to train physicians to implant pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Although there are international recommendations for device indications and programming, there is no consensus to date regarding implantation technique. This document is founded on a systematic literature search and review, and on consensus from an international task force. It aims to fill the gap by setting standards for device implantation.

Avoiding implant complications in cardiac implantable electronic devices: what works?

Nearly one in ten patients experience complications in relation to cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations. CIED complications have serious implications for the patients and for the healthcare system. In light of the rising rates of new implants and consistent rate of complications, primary prevention remains a major concern. To guide future efforts, we sought to review the evidence base underlying common preventive actions made during a primary CIED implantation.

Ultrasound guided percutaneous cephalic venipuncture for implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices

BACKGROUND

Preoperative ultrasound (US) for cephalic cut-down is related to shorter procedure time and higher success rate. This study aimed to assess efficiency of US-guided percutaneous cephalic vein (CV) puncture for placement of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).

METHODS

Patients undergoing a procedure including both US-guided pectoral nerve block (PECS) and percutaneous CV puncture were retrospectively investigated. Patient medical history and demographic data was collected. Clinical features of the procedures and intra- and post-operative complications occurring were collected from patient records. Clinical data included target vessel features, and the time taken for the following: CV puncture; CV and PECS puncture; total procedure.

RESULTS

In total 34 patients had CV puncture with US-guided PECS block was attempted in all patients and the procedure was successful in 27 of 34 (79.4%) patients. The total number of CV puncture attempts was 62 for 34 leads (mean attempts per lead = 1.82). The mean ± standard deviation time for CV puncture was 137.5 ± 27.4 s. There were no venous access-related complications.

CONCLUSION

US-guided CV puncture appears feasible and safe with an acceptable success rate. In case of failure of the US-guided axillary or subclavian vein approach, it may be preferred as an alternative to the cephalic cut-down procedure, where the success rate is relatively lower and the risk of bleeding is higher.

Strategies to Promote Long-Term Cardiac Implant Site Health

In the past several decades there has been a continuous growth in the field of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation procedures as well as their technological development. CIEDs utilize transvenous leads that are introduced into the heart via the axillary, subclavian, or cephalic veins, as well as a devices generator that is implanted in a subcutaneous pocket, typically in the pre-pectoral region. Despite this significant improvement, complication rates range from 1-6% with current implant tools and techniques. In this review we will discuss the three central parts of the CIED implantation procedure, their impact on implantation site, infections, and possibilities for its prevention.

The New Surface Landmarks for Blind Axillary Vein Puncture

Objective

To compare the efficacy of blind axillary vein puncture utilizing the new surface landmarks for the subclavian method.

Methods

This prospective and randomized study was performed at two cardiology medical centers in East China. Five hundred thirty-eight patients indicated to undergo left-sided pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation were enrolled, 272 patients under the axillary access and 266 patients under the subclavian approach. A new superficial landmark was used for the axillary venous approach, whereas conventional landmarks were used for the subclavian venous approach. We measured lead placement time and X-ray time from vein puncture until all leads were placed in superior vena cava. Meanwhile, the rate of success of lead placement and the type and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups.

Results

There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics or number of leads implanted. There were high success rates for both strategies (98.6% [494/501] vs. 98.4% [479/487], P=0.752) and similar complication rates (14% [38/272] vs. 15% [40/266], P=0.702). Six cases in the control group developed subclavian venous crush syndrome and five had pneumothorax, while neither pneumothorax nor subclavian venous crush syndrome was observed in the experimental group.

Conclusion

We have developed a new blind approach to cannulate the axillary vein, which is as effective as the subclavian access, safer than that, and also allows to get this vein without the guidance of fluoroscopy, contrast, or echography.

Ultrasound-guided Axillary Vein Puncture in Cardiac Lead Implantation: Time to Move to a New Standard Access?

Cardiac stimulation therapy has evolved significantly over the past 30 years. Currently, cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are the mainstream therapy for many potentially lethal heart conditions, such as advanced atrioventricular block or sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. Despite sometimes being lifesaving, the implant is surgical and therefore carries all the inevitable intrinsic risks. In the process of technology evolution, one of the most important factors is to make it safer for the patient. In the context of CIED implants, complications include accidental puncture of intrathoracic structures. Alternative strategies to intrathoracic subclavian vein puncture include cephalic vein dissection or axillary vein puncture, which can be guided by fluoroscopy, venography or, more recently, ultrasound. In this article, the authors analyse the state of the art of ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture using evidence from landmark studies in this field.

Comprehensive strategies to minimize radiation exposure during Interventional electrophysiology procedures: state-of-the-art review

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac electrophysiology (EP) procedures are frequently performed in patients with cardiac arrhythmias, chronic heart failure, and sudden cardiac death. Most EP procedures involve fluoroscopy, which results in radiation exposure to physicians, patients, and EP lab staff. Accumulated radiation exposure is a known health detriment to patients and physicians.

AREA COVERED

This review will summarize radiation exposure, dose metrics, complications of radiation exposure, factors affecting radiation exposure, minimizing radiation exposure, zero or near-zero fluoroscopy strategies, and up-to-date research in the area of reducing radiation exposure and best practices.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Comprehensive strategies should be implemented in EP laboratories to minimize radiation exposure with standard fluoroscopy. There are routine techniques that can mitigate significant amounts of radiation exposure using standard equipment within the EP lab. The operators need to emphasize that EP practices routinely incorporate non-ionizing radiation sources for cardiac imaging (e.g. magnetic resonance imaging, advanced electroanatomical mapping systems, intracardiac ultrasonography) in addition to other novel technologies to mitigate radiation exposure to patients and physicians.

Ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture for cardiac devices implantation in patients under antithrombotic therapy

Background

Ultrasound-guided axillary venous puncture (UGAVP) for cardiac devices implantation has been developed because of its rapidity, safety and potential long-term lead protection. Early work excluded defibrillators (ICD), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and upgrade procedures. Compared to the cephalic approach, in previous studies, there was a greater use of pressure dressings with this technique, suggesting a higher risk of bleeding.

Aims

To assess UGAVP in patients under antithrombotic therapy (ATT) undergoing cardiac devices implantation including CRT/ICD.

Methods

Prospectively, consecutive patients eligible for a pacemaker or ICD implantation were included. All procedures were performed by a single operator, experienced with UGAVP for femoral access, and fluoroscopy-guided axillary vein access. Guidewires insertion time (from lidocaïne administration), and complications were systematically studied.

Results

From 457 cardiac device implantations, 200 patients (77.8 ± 10 y, male 58%) 360 leads were implanted by UGAVP including 36 ICD, 54 CRT and 14 upgrade procedures. A majority (90%) was under ATT: Vitamin K Antagonist or Heparin (n = 58, 29%), direct oral anticoagulant (n = 46, 23%), dual antithrombotic therapy (n = 18, 9%) and single antiplatelet drug (n = 82, 41%). UGAVP was successful in 95.78%. Mean insertion time for 1.8 guidewires per patient was 4.68 ± 3.6 min. No complication (no hematoma) was observed during the follow-up (mean of 45 ± 10 months). Guidewires insertion time reached its plateau after 15 patients.

Conclusion

UGAVP is fast, feasible and safe for patients under ATT undergoing device implantation including CRT/ICD and upgrade procedures, with a short learning curve.

Vein Management for Cardiac Device Implantation

Transvenous approaches for pacemaker and defibrillator lead insertion offer numerous advantages over epicardial techniques. Although the cephalic, axillary, and subclavian veins are most commonly used in clinical practice, they each offer their own set of advantages and disadvantages that leave their usage dependent on patient anatomy and physician preference. Alternative methods using the upper and lower venous circulation have been described when these veins are not available or practical for lead insertion. Until current technology is superseded by leadless pacing systems, the search for the optimal lead insertion technique continues.

Minimizing Radiation in the Modern Electrophysiology Laboratory

Historically, the electrophysiology laboratory has relied heavily on the use of ionizing radiation in the form of fluoroscopy for a broad range of interventions and diagnostics. As the harmful effects of radiation have become increasingly recognized and procedural technologies have advanced, electrophysiologists have adopted new workflows. The purpose of this article is to review the available literature and experience in minimizing radiation in the modern electrophysiology laboratory. This review first covers general approaches to reducing fluoroscopy radiation in the electrophysiology suite, with concepts that apply across all procedure types. These include the reduction of infrared emission through fastidious fluoroscopy settings, new and proven solutions for radiation shielding, and methods of creating distance between the radiation source and the operator to reduce exposure. Following this discussion, we review specific task-based techniques for reducing radiation during special electrophysiologic procedures and workflows such as vascular access, coronary sinus lead placement, catheter manipulation, and periprocedural planning studies.

Subclavian access using a three-dimensional electromagnetic cardiovascular navigation system: novel approach to access the venous system during device implant procedures

We report a case in which a novel three-dimensional (3D) electromagnetic cardiovascular navigation system (MediGude™, St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA) was used to create a 3D reconstruction of the axillary vein and its anatomic course to guide its successful puncture and cannulation. The MediGuide system's projection accuracy has proved to offer a level of precision that is sufficient to achieve axillary vein access. This highlights its enormous possibilities to obtain 3D venous system reconstruction with minimal fluoroscopic use when performing cardiac or even non-cardiac procedures.

An entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) prevent sudden death from cardiac causes in selected patients but require the use of transvenous lead systems. To eliminate the need for venous access, we designed and tested an entirely subcutaneous ICD system.

METHODS

First, we conducted two short-term clinical trials to identify a suitable device configuration and assess energy requirements. We evaluated four subcutaneous ICD configurations in 78 patients who were candidates for ICD implantation and subsequently tested the best configuration in 49 additional patients to determine the subcutaneous defibrillation threshold in comparison with that of the standard transvenous ICD. Then we evaluated the long-term use of subcutaneous ICDs in a pilot study, involving 6 patients, which was followed by a trial involving 55 patients.

RESULTS

The best device configuration consisted of a parasternal electrode and a left lateral thoracic pulse generator. This configuration was as effective as a transvenous ICD for terminating induced ventricular fibrillation, albeit with a significantly higher mean (+/-SD) energy requirement (36.6+/-19.8 J vs. 11.1+/-8.5 J). Among patients who received a permanent subcutaneous ICD, ventricular fibrillation was successfully detected in 100% of 137 induced episodes. Induced ventricular fibrillation was converted twice in 58 of 59 patients (98%) with the delivery of 65-J shocks in two consecutive tests. Clinically significant adverse events included two pocket infections and four lead revisions. After a mean of 10+/-1 months, the device had successfully detected and treated all 12 episodes of spontaneous, sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia.

CONCLUSIONS

In small, nonrandomized studies, an entirely subcutaneous ICD consistently detected and converted ventricular fibrillation induced during electrophysiological testing. The device also successfully detected and treated all 12 episodes of spontaneous, sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00399217 and NCT00853645.)