Inappropriate Discharges of Intravenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators Owing to Lead Failure

Bilateral Subclavian Vein Occlusion in a SAPHO Syndrome Patient Who Needed an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

A 79-year-old Asian man was hospitalized because of progressive exertional dyspnea with decreasing left ventricular ejection fraction and frequent non-sustained ventricular tachycardia. Pre-procedure venography for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation showed occlusion of the bilateral subclavian veins. In consideration of subcutaneous humps in the sterno-clavicular area and palmoplantar pustulosis, we diagnosed him as having synovitis, acne, pustulosis, hyperostosis, osteitis (SAPHO) syndrome and speculated that it induced peri-osteal chronic inflammation in the sterno-clavicular area, resulting in occlusion of the adjacent bilateral subclavian veins. An automatic external defibrillator (AED) was installed in the patient's house and total subcutaneous ICD was considered. Venous thrombosis in SAPHO syndrome is not frequent but has been reported. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of bilateral subclavian vein occlusion in a SAPHO syndrome patient who needs ICD implantation.

Dental management of a patient fitted with subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator device and concomitant warfarin treatment

Automated Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (AICD), simply known as an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD), has been used in patients for more than 30 years. An Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) is a small battery-powered electrical impulse generator that is implanted in patients who are at a risk of sudden cardiac death due to ventricular fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia or any such related event. Typically, patients with these types of occurrences are on anticoagulant therapy. The desired International Normalized Ratio (INR) for these patients is in the range of 2–3 to prevent any subsequent cardiac event. These patients possess a challenge to the dentist in many ways, especially during oral surgical procedures, and these challenges include risk of sudden death, control of post-operative bleeding and pain.

This article presents the dental management of a 60 year-old person with an ICD and concomitant anticoagulant therapy. The patient was on multiple medications and was treated for a grossly neglected mouth with multiple carious root stumps. This case report outlines the important issues in managing patients fitted with an ICD device and at a risk of sudden cardiac death.

Implantable defibrillator lead extraction with optimized standard extraction techniques

Background

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads might not be extracted especially in developing countries because of the high cost and lack of specialized tools. We aimed to evaluate transvenous extraction of ICD leads using optimized standard techniques.

Methods

We prospectively analyzed clinical characteristics, optimized extraction techniques and the feasibility of extraction for 40 patients (33 males; mean age 47.9 ± 16.1 years) with 42 ICD leads.

Results

Complete procedural success rate was 95.2% (40/42), and the clinical success rate was 97.6% (41/42). One ICD lead required cardiothoracic surgery. Minor complications occurred in three cases (7.5%), and no major complications or death occurred. Locking stylets were used to extract most leads (34, 81.0%) and almost half of the leads (20, 47.6%) required mechanical dilatation to free fibrotic adhesions; these leads had been implanted for a longer period of time than the others (43.7 ± 18.2 vs. 18.4 ± 13.4 months, P < 0.05). Three-quarters of the leads (30, 71.4%) were extracted with locking stylets plus manual traction (12, 28.6%), or mechanical dilatation with counter-traction (18, 42.8%) by the superior vena cava approach and one-quarter of the leads (11, 26.2%) were removed by optimized snare techniques using the femoral vein approach. Median extraction time was 20 min (range 2–68 min) per lead. Linear regression analysis showed that the extraction time was significantly correlated with implant duration (r = 0.70, P < 0.001). Median follow-up was 14.5 months (range 1–58 months), no infection, or procedure-related death occurred in our series.

Conclusions

Our optimized procedure for transvenous extraction of ICD leads provides a practical and low-cost method for standard procedures.

Patient and cardiologist perceptions on decision making for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Although implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in selected patients, they are also associated with potential risks. Periprocedural decision making requires understanding both benefits and risks.

METHODS

This qualitative study aims to understand cardiologists' and patients' perspectives about decision making surrounding ICD implantation using semi-structured, in-depth interviews. We interviewed 11 cardiologists (including four electrophysiologists) and 20 patients (14 with ICDs; six who declined ICDs). The data were analyzed through the theoretical lens of patient-centered care using the constant comparative method.

RESULTS

Cardiologists emphasized the benefits of ICD therapy but varied substantially in the extent to which they emphasized the various risks associated with ICD implantation with patients. Cardiologists indicated that they were influenced by the benefits of therapy as presented in published guidelines. Many patients who chose to receive an ICD indicated that they followed the advice of their physician without questioning the risks and benefits of the device. Some ICD recipients described not learning many of the risks until after device implantation or when they experienced these side effects. Patients who declined ICD implantation were concerned that the ICD was unnecessary or believed that the risks related to sudden death without an ICD did not apply to them. Only one patient considered the trade-off between dying quickly versus living longer with progressive heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

In our sample, cardiologists' desire to adhere to published guidelines appears to inhibit shared decision making. The marked variability in the discussions surrounding ICD decisions highlights a need for an improved process of ICD decision making.

Regional variation in the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention: results from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry

BACKGROUND

Although the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death varies by sex, race, and hospital, geographic variation in ICD use remains unexplored. Our objective was to quantify regional variations in the utilization of primary prevention ICDs in the United States, and to evaluate if an association exists between utilization and physician supply or the proportion of patients meeting the trial inclusion criteria.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a cross-sectional analysis among the Medicare, fee-for-service population from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Using hospital referral regions, we calculated the age-, sex-, and race-adjusted rates of ICD placement for each region and assessed the correlation between these rates and (1) physician supply and (2) the proportion of patients meeting trial inclusion criteria. Substantial variation was found across quintiles of rate ratios of ICD implantation, ranging from 0.39 to 1.77 (compared with a national mean rate of 1.0). This ratio was not correlated with the supply of cardiologists (R(2)=0.01), electrophysiologists (R(2)=0.01), or with the proportion of patients meeting trial inclusion criteria (R(2)<0.01). Over all, 13% of all patients receiving ICDs did not meet trial criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Marked geographic variation in the use of primary prevention ICDs exists across the United States that is not correlated with physician supply. Although >1 in 10 patients received ICDs outside of trial criteria, this potential overuse did not explain the variation. Future studies should consider underuse or misuse of primary prevention ICDs as causes of geographic variation.