Key result
Electrosurgery in pacemaker or ICD patients shows extremely low complication rates with no significant morbidity.
Why the study?
What precautions are taken and what complications occur when electrosurgery is used in patients with pacemakers or ICDs by cutaneous surgeons?
Cross-Sectional (n=166)
Yes
What precautions are taken and what complications occur when electrosurgery is used in patients with pacemakers or ICDs by cutaneous surgeons?
Significant interference to pacemakers or ICDs rarely results from office-based electrosurgery, and the use of bipolar forceps or true electrocautery are recommended as safer options.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports cautious electrosurgery with precautions in device patients; leaves open prospective validation of bipolar forceps and true cautery.
BACKGROUND: Minimal information is available in the literature regarding the precautions implemented or complications experienced by cutaneous surgeons when electrosurgery is used in patients with pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). The literature pertinent to dermatologists is primarily based on experiences of other surgical specialties and a generally recommended thorough perioperative evaluation. OBJECTIVE: To determine what precautions are currently taken by cutaneous surgeons in patients with pacemakers or ICDs, and what types of complications have occurred due to electrosurgery in a dermatologic setting. METHODS: In the winter of 2000, a survey was mailed to 419 U.S.-based members of the American College of Mohs Micrographic Surgery and Cutaneous Oncology (ACMMSCO). RESULTS: A total of 166 (40%) surveys were returned. Routine precautions included utilizing short bursts of less than 5 seconds (71%), use of minimal power (61%), and avoiding use around the pacemaker or ICD (57%). The types of interference reported were skipped beats (eight patients), reprogramming of a pacemaker (six patients), firing of an ICD (four patients), asystole (three patients), bradycardia (two patients), depleted battery life of a pacemaker (one patient), and an unspecified tachyarrhythmia (one patient). Overall there was a low rate of complications (0.8 cases/100 years of surgical practice), with no reported significant morbidity or mortality. Bipolar forceps were utilized by 19% of respondents and were not associated with any incidences of interference. CONCLUSIONS: Significant interference to pacemakers or ICDs rarely results from office-based electrosurgery. No clear community practice standards regarding precautions was evident from this survey. The use of bipolar forceps or true electrocautery are the better options when electrosurgey is required. These two modalities may necessitate fewer perioperative precautions than generally recommended, without compromising patient safety.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Elgamal et al. (2001) conducted a cross-sectional in Patients with pacemakers or ICDs undergoing electrosurgery (n=166). Electrosurgery was evaluated on Precautions taken and complications experienced. A survey of cutaneous surgeons found a low rate of complications from electrosurgery in patients with pacemakers or ICDs, with no significant morbidity.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: