Same-day discharge after implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Outcomes of an expedited same-day discharge protocol following cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation

BACKGROUND

With increasing constraints on healthcare resources, greater attention is being focused on improved resource utilization. Prior studies have demonstrated safety of same-day discharge following CIED implantation but are limited by vague protocols with long observation periods. In this study, we evaluate the safety of an expedited 2 hour same-day discharge protocol following CIED implantation.

METHODS

Patients undergoing CIED implantation at three centers between 2015 and 2021 were included. Procedural, demographic, and adverse event data were abstracted from the electronic health record. Patients were divided into same-day discharge (SDD) and delayed discharge (DD) cohorts. The primary outcome was complications including lead malfunction requiring revision, pneumothorax, hemothorax, lead dislodgement, lead perforation with tamponade, and mortality within 30 days of procedure. Outcomes were compared between the two cohorts using the χ2 test.

RESULTS

A total of 4543 CIED implantation procedures were included with 1557 patients (34%) in the SDD cohort. SDD patients were comparatively younger, were more likely to be male, and had fewer comorbidities than DD patients. Among SDD patients, the mean time to post-operative chest X-ray was 2.6 h. SDD had lower rates of complications (1.3% vs 2.1%, p = 0.0487) and acute care utilization post-discharge (9.6% vs 14.0%, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in the 90-day infection rate between the cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

An expedited 2 hour same-day discharge protocol is safe and effective with low rates of complications, infection, and post-operative acute care utilization.

Management of anesthesia for procedures in the cardiac electrophysiology laboratory

The complexity of cardiac electrophysiology procedures has increased significantly during the past 3 decades. Anesthesia requirements of these procedures can differ on the basis of patient- and procedure-specific factors. This manuscript outlines various anesthesia strategies for cardiac implantable electronic devices and electrophysiology procedures, including preprocedural, procedural, and postprocedural management. A team-based approach with collaboration between cardiac electrophysiologists and anesthesiologists is required with careful preprocedural and intraprocedural planning. Given the recent advances in electrophysiology, there is a need for specialized cardiac electrophysiology anesthesia care to improve the efficacy and safety of the procedures.

Safety and feasibility of same-day discharge following uncomplicated transvenous lead extraction

INTRODUCTION

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE), while mostly a safe procedure, has risk of serious periprocedural complications. As such, overnight hospitalization remains a routine practice. In our center, we routinely discharge patients on the same day following an uncomplicated TLE.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 265 consecutive patients who underwent uncomplicated TLE in our center between 2019 and 2021. Same-day discharge (SDD) patients are compared with those who stayed at least overnight for observation after the TLE procedure (non-SDD group). To assess the safety of an SDD strategy after uncomplicated TLE, the main study endpoint was to compare the rate of major procedure-related complications at 1-, 7-, and 30-days. To identify the factors influencing the operator's decision to discharge the patient on the same day, the secondary endpoint was to analyze clinical and procedural predictors of SDD.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients were discharged the same day after uncomplicated TLE (SDD), while 112 stayed at least overnight after the procedure (non-SDD). There was no significant difference in major procedure-related complications at 1-day (SDD 0% vs. non-SDD 1.8%, p value = ns), while patients in the SDD group had a lower rate of 7- and 30-day complications when compared with those in the non-SDD group (2.1% vs. 8.2%, p value = .0308; and 3.5% vs. 16%, p value = .0049, respectively). Noninfectious indication for TLE (OR 16.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.29-77.6) and procedure end time before 12:00 (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.11-7.27) were the only independent predictors of SDD.

CONCLUSION

SDD discharge following uncomplicated TLE in selected patients (i.e., those without device infection and when the TLE procedure is completed in the morning) is feasible and safe.

Length of hospital stay for elective electrophysiological procedures: a survey from the European Heart Rhythm Association

AIMS

Electrophysiological (EP) operations that have traditionally involved long hospital lengths of stay (LOS) are now being undertaken as day case procedures. The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic served as an impetus for many centres to shorten LOS for EP procedures. This survey explores LOS for elective EP procedures in the modern era.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An online survey consisting of 27 multiple-choice questions was completed by 245 respondents from 35 countries. With respect to de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations, day case procedures were reported for 79.5% of implantable loop recorders, 13.3% of pacemakers (PMs), 10.4% of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and 10.2% of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. With respect to CIED generator replacements, day case procedures were reported for 61.7% of PMs, 49.2% of ICDs, and 48.2% of CRT devices. With regard to ablations, day case procedures were reported for 5.7% of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations, 10.7% of left-sided ablations, and 17.5% of right-sided ablations. A LOS ≥ 2 days for CIED implantation was reported for 47.7% of PM, 54.5% of ICDs, and 56.9% of CRT devices and for 54.5% of AF ablations, 42.2% of right-sided ablations, and 46.1% of left-sided ablations. Reimbursement (43-56%) and bed availability (20-47%) were reported to have no consistent impact on the organization of elective procedures.

CONCLUSION

There is a wide variation in the LOS for elective EP procedures. The LOS for some procedures appears disproportionate to their complexity. Neither reimbursement nor bed availability consistently influenced LOS.

Same-Day Discharge After Left Bundle Area Pacing

BACKGROUND

Left bundle area pacing (LBAP) has emerged as an area that appears to be an attractive alternative to other forms of physiological pacing owing to its ease and favorable pacing parameters. Same-day discharge after conventional pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, and more recently leadless pacemakers have become routine, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. With the advent of LBAP, the safety and feasibility of same-day discharge remain unclear.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, observational case series of consecutive, sequential patients undergoing LBAP at Baystate Medical Center, an academic teaching hospital. We included all patients who underwent LBAP and were discharged on the same day of procedure completion. Safety parameters included any procedure-related complications including pneumothorax, cardiac tamponade, septal perforation, and lead dislodgement. Pacemaker parameters included pacing threshold, R-wave amplitude, and lead impedance pre-discharge the following day of implantation and up to 6 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 11 patients were included in our analysis, the average age was 70.3 ± 6.74 years. The most common indication for pacemaker insertion was AV block (73%). No complications were seen in any of the patients. The average time between the procedure and discharge was 5.6 hours. Pacemaker and lead parameters were stable after 6 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In this case series, we find that same-day discharge after LBAP for any indication is a safe and feasible option. As this mode of pacing becomes increasingly more common, larger prospective studies evaluating the safety and feasibility of early discharge after LBAP will be needed.

Differences in patient characteristics, clinical practice and outcomes of cardiac implantable electric device therapy between Japan and the USA: a cross-sectional study using data from nationally representative administrative databases

OBJECTIVES

To identify differences in patient characteristics, clinical practice and outcomes of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy between Japan and the USA.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Nationally representative administrative databases from Japan and the USA containing hospitalisations with first-time implantations of pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) and cardiac-resynchronisation therapy with or without defibrillators (CRTP/CRTD).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients hospitalised with first-time implantations of CIEDs.

OUTCOME MEASURES

In-hospital mortality, in-hospital complication and 30-day readmission rates.

RESULTS

Overall, 107 339 (median age 78 (71-84), 48 415 women) and 295 584 (age 76 (67-83), 127 349 women) records with CIED implantations were included from Japan and the USA, respectively. Proportion of women in defibrillator recipients was lower in Japan than in the USA (ICD, 21% vs 28%, p<0.001; CRTD, 24% vs 29%, p<0.001). Length of stay after CIED implantation was longer in Japan than in the USA for all device types (conventional pacemaker, 8(7-11) vs 1 (1-3) days, p<0.001; leadless pacemaker, 5 (3-9) vs 2 (1-5) days, p<0.001; ICD, 8 (7-11) vs 1 (1-3) days, p<0.001, CRTP, 9 (7-13) vs 2 (1-4) days, p<0.001; CRTD, 9 (8-14) vs 2 (1-4) days, p<0.001). In-hospital mortality after CIED implantation was similar between Japan and the USA ((OR) (95% CI), conventional pacemaker 0.58 (0.83 to 1.004); ICD 0.77 (0.57 to 1.03); CRTP 0.85 (0.51 to 1.44); CRTD 1.11 (0.81 to 1.51)), except that after leadless pacemaker implantation in Japan was lower than that in the USA (0.32 (0.23 to 0.43)). 30-day readmission rates were lower in Japan than in the USA for all device types (conventional pacemaker 0.55 (0.53 to 0.57); leadless pacemaker 0.50 (0.43 to 0.58); ICD 0.54 (0.49 to 0.58); CRTP 0.51 (0.42 to 0.62); CRTD 0.57 (0.51 to 0.64)).

CONCLUSIONS

International variations in patient characteristics, practice and outcomes were observed. In-hospital mortality after CIED implantation was similar between Japan and the USA, except in cases of leadless pacemaker recipients.

Safety and feasibility of same-day discharge following catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: what is known and what needs to be explored?

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most effective rhythm control strategy and its role in the treatment of AF patients has been strengthened by recent guidelines. An increasing AF prevalence and the resulting demands on interventional electrophysiology call for improved resource allocation through both technical innovations and streamlined workflows and patient pathways. Same-day discharge is already established in the context of other electrophysiological interventions; however, its broad implementation in the practice of AF ablation is pending for several reasons, despite the fact that the body of evidence is growing and the majority of reports propagate early discharge to be feasible and safe under certain conditions. This review article is intended to provide an overview of the existing data, classify these into the specific study context, and to show limitations and open questions.