Key result
Cardiac implantable electronic devices are associated with a risk of superior vena cava syndrome, necessitating rapid identification of clinical symptoms to prevent morbidity and mortality.
Why the study?
A growing number of implantable cardiac device procedures has resulted in more patients presenting with superior vena cava syndrome of non-malignant etiology.
Clinicians should be aware of the risk of SVC syndrome as a complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices to ensure rapid identification and management.
Highlights need for vigilance on SVC obstruction in device patients; leaves open prospective studies on screening.
INTRODUCTION: Superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome is a rare clinical disorder associated with obstructing venous outflow through the SVC. Although the most common cause is mediastinal tumors, the growing number of implantable cardiac devices procedures has resulted in more patients with SVC syndrome of non‐malignant etiology. DISCUSSION: It has been shown repeatedly that the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) improves the quality of life of patients with symptomatic arrhythmias and reduces the mortality of patients at risk of sudden cardiac death, but the risk of complications also exists. CONCLUSION: The most common finding in patients with cardiac devices is asymptomatic venous thrombosis, but serious complications, including SVC obstruction should always be considered. The rapid identification of clinical symptoms and the implementation of appropriate measures are a key to preventing the morbidity and mortality of the patients. JRCD 2018; 4 (1): 5-8.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jonik et al. (2019) conducted a review in Superior vena cava syndrome. Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) was evaluated. Cardiac implantable electronic devices are associated with a risk of superior vena cava syndrome, necessitating rapid identification of clinical symptoms to prevent morbidity and mortality.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: