Misadventures With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators: The Hits Just Keep on Coming

Fundamental Electrophysiology Principles Related to Perioperative Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices

An increasing number of patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery in the United States have a cardiovascular implantable electronic device. Practice advisories and consensus statements have been issued by the American Society of Anesthesiologists and the Heart Rhythm Society, advocating a multidisciplinary approach. Unfortunately, anesthesia providers often find themselves in a situation in which they are left to manage these devices independently. At the University of Washington Medical Center, an anesthesiology-based service to manage these devices has existed for more than a decade. Many problems with devices have been observed, including confusing rhythms, failure of magnets to provide the desired change in device function, and actual device malfunction. With these clinical case examples taken from the authors' collective experience, this article provides an in-depth understanding of some key electrophysiology principles relevant to cardiovascular implantable electronic device function and appropriate perioperative management.

Perioperative Management of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: A Single-Center Report of 469 Interrogations

OBJECTIVE

Anesthesiologists increasingly are involved in the perioperative management of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). The variety of devices available and the ongoing advancements in technology, programming capabilities, and responses to conventional management (eg, magnet application) complicate the management of these devices. As an aid to this clinical challenge, this manuscript reviews 469 interrogations performed by a single cardiac anesthesiologist during a 4.5-year period to derive useful information with which to guide anesthesiologists who have chosen to pursue training in this area of perioperative care.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

SETTING

Single institution, quaternary care hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with CIEDs presenting for surgery; the quality assurance (QA) reports of 469 interrogations performed between May 2015 and September 2019 were reviewed.

INTERVENTIONS

No intervention.

MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS

The distributions of surgical procedures, device types, device manufacturers, pacing modes, rate-response sensors, special functions, and performed interventions were reviewed and analyzed. The QA reports were evaluated to identify information or experiences that demonstrated important lessons for anesthesiologists engaging in perioperative CIED management.

CONCLUSIONS

This database review provides general guidance for anesthesiologists managing CIEDs in the perioperative period. Concepts germane to the operating room are emphasized.