Key result
Female patients had a significantly larger cephalic vein diameter compared to male patients (3.5 mm vs 2.9 mm, p=0.030), indicating more favorable morpho-anatomical features for lead placement.
Why the study?
Minimally invasive and safe central venous access is imperative for CIED lead insertion, but whether cephalic vein usability differs between sexes required exploration.
Does female sex correlate with better cephalic vein usability and more favorable morpho-anatomical characteristics for CIED lead placement compared to male sex?
Observational (n=102)
No
Does female sex correlate with better cephalic vein usability and more favorable morpho-anatomical characteristics for CIED lead placement compared to male sex?
Absolute Event Rate: 3.5% vs 2.9%
p-value: p=0.030
Female patients exhibit more favorable cephalic vein morpho-anatomical features, including larger diameter, leading to better usability for CIED lead placement compared to male patients.
Background Minimally invasive and safe central venous access is imperative for lead insertion of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). The purpose of this trial was to explore and compare the usability of the cephalic vein (CV) between both sexes. Methods and results This single-center prospective study included 102 consecutive patients in a period of six months. Pre-procedural contrast-enhanced venographic images of the upper arm were performed in all included patients. Our attention was focused on comparing several morpho-anatomical CV characteristics such as venous diameter, presence of valves and angle of entrance of the CV into the subclavian vein (SV). Study results concerning the CV morpho-anatomical differences were more favorable regarding the female patient group, with significant differences in CV diameter ( p -0.030). There was also a difference in favor of the female group regarding the favorable CV angle of entrance into the SV, found in the 61.7% versus 54.4% in the male patient group. The comparison of usability of the CV and CVC technique was explored by comparing the number of leads inserted through the CV in both sexes. Two leads were implanted in 11.7% in the female group versus 5.8% in the male group, and 0 leads through the CV in 38.2% of the female patients versus 50% of male group. Conclusion Female patients have more favorable cephalic vein morpho-anatomical futures and better usability for lead placement than male patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Taleski et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Patients referred for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation (n=102). Female sex vs. Male sex was evaluated on Cephalic vein diameter (mm) (p=0.030). Female patients had a significantly larger cephalic vein diameter compared to male patients (3.5 mm vs 2.9 mm, p=0.030), indicating more favorable morpho-anatomical features for lead placement.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: