Why the study?
Anaesthetic management of patients undergoing cardiovascular implantable electronic device implantation remains an open question with unclear risk factors for complications.
What are the complication rates and risk factors associated with anaesthesiological support during CIED implantation?
Observational (n=269)
No
What are the complication rates and risk factors associated with anaesthesiological support during CIED implantation?
Patients undergoing CIED implantation have a high rate of complications (29%), particularly during lead extraction or in those with NYHA class 4, justifying the involvement of a qualified anaesthesiologist.
BACKGROUND: Implantation of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has greatly increased during the last decade and anaesthetic management of these patients remains an open question. OBJECTIVE: This study describes anaesthetic management and risk factors associated with complications occurring during these procedures. DESIGN: A single-centre prospective observational study. SETTING: Grenoble University Hospital, France, from May 2010 to October 2010. PATIENTS: All patients admitted to the cardiac electrophysiology laboratory were included. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical data, anaesthetic and medical characteristics as well as complications (respiratory or cardiovascular) and treatment were recorded by the anaesthetic nurse at the end of each procedure. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-nine patients were included, 229 (85%) with an American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) status of 3 or 4, 103 (38%) with a New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class of 3 or 4 and 136 (51%) with a left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 40%. Two hundred and forty-seven (92%) of the patients underwent deep sedation and 12 (8%) general anaesthesia. Seventy-eight (29%) patients had at least one complication, among whom 21 (27%) had at least one considered as severe. Fifty (19%) of the patients had a respiratory complication and 46 (17%) a cardiovascular complication; the latter was more frequently severe (41 vs. 12%; P=0.001). Lead extraction [odds ratio (OR) 13.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.5 to 53.3; P<0.001], NYHA status of 4 (OR 11.8, 95% CI 1.8 to 74.8; P<0.001), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) testing by T-wave shock (OR 3.9, 95% CI 1.53 to 10.2; P=0.005) and length of procedure (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.004 to 1.031; P=0.013) were identified as independent risk factors for cardiovascular complications. CONCLUSION: Patients requiring cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation were fragile with a high complication rate and a high rate of severe complications even with anaesthesiological support. These complications, as well as the need for deep sedation or general anaesthesia, clearly justify the involvement of a qualified anaesthesiologist.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Trouvé-Buisson et al. (2013) conducted an observational in Patients undergoing cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation (n=269). Lead extraction vs. No lead extraction was evaluated on Cardiovascular complications (OR 13.7, 95% CI 3.5-53.3, p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: