Key result
Pacemaker implantation via subclavian venipection resulted in a massive hemothorax 21 hours post-surgery due to a ruptured left subclavian artery branch, successfully treated with VATS.
Case Report (n=1)
Highlights the risk of adjacent artery damage during subclavian venipection for pacemaker implantation and the utility of VATS for managing resulting hemothorax.
Delayed hemothorax from subclavian arterial branch rupture warrants vigilance after difficult venipuncture; case report leaves open safer access techniques.
Pacemaker implantation via subclavian venipection is a common procedure.A patient who had a pacemaker implanted via subclavian venipection developed a massive hemothorax 21 hours after surgery.The video-assisted thoracic surgery(VATS) showed that the left subclavian artery branch ruptured and bled,and titanium clip was used to clamp and stop bleeding. For patients with difficulty in puncture process,even if it is confirmed that the device is inserted into the subclavian vein,it is important to be vigilant against damaging adjacent arteries in the process, and strict electrocardiograph monitoring should be conducted after surgery. Once hemothorax appears,VATS should be performed in conjunction with the surgeon to locate the bleeding point and stop the bleeding.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cheng et al. (2022) conducted a case report in Pacemaker implantation via subclavian venipection (n=1). Pacemaker implantation via subclavian venipection was evaluated on Massive hemothorax. Pacemaker implantation via subclavian venipection resulted in a massive hemothorax 21 hours post-surgery due to a ruptured left subclavian artery branch, successfully treated with VATS.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: