Key result
PlasmaBlade-guided S-ICD implantation yields similar complication rates regardless of anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy.
Why the study?
Surgical implantation of S-ICD is associated with infection and bleeding complications, especially in patients on antiplatelet therapy or oral anticoagulation, and the safety of PEAK PlasmaBlade™ in this setting is not established.
Is S-ICD implantation using a pulsed electron avalanche knife safe and feasible regarding perioperative bleeding complications in patients on varying anticoagulation regimens?
Observational (n=36)
Is S-ICD implantation using a pulsed electron avalanche knife safe and feasible regarding perioperative bleeding complications in patients on varying anticoagulation regimens?
The use of a pulsed electron avalanche knife during S-ICD implantation appears safe and feasible, with no major bleeding complications observed regardless of the patient's anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy status.
Surgical implantation of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICD) requires preparation of a deeper and larger pocket. Infection and bleeding complications are reported, particularly in patients requiring antiplatelet therapy (APT) or being on oral anticoagulation (OAC), with rates up to 25%. The pulsed electron avalanche knife (PEAK) PlasmaBlade™ has been reported to reduce bleeding complications. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a PEAK guided S-ICD implantation with respect to perioperative complications. We enrolled 36 consecutive patients (75% male; mean age 52.1 ± 14.4 years) undergoing S-ICD implantation. Periprocedural safety endpoints comprised major complications including pocket hematomas, wound infections, bleeding (BARC ≥2) or events requiring interventions. Patients were divided into three groups according to management of their anticoagulation: i.) APT, n = 15 (41.7%); ii.) OAC, n = 10 patients (27.8%); iii.) none (neither OAC nor APT), n = 11 (30.6%). Mean procedure duration was 33.1 ± 13.4 min. Mean length of hospital stay was 3.3 ± 2.1 days. Overall analysis showed no differences between the 3 groups with respect to major complications, major bleeding episodes or other procedural parameters, beside a trend towards more minor hematomas in the OAC group (OAC: 22.2% vs. APT: 11.4% vs. none: 9.1%; p = 0.15). The results of our pilot study suggest that intermuscular S-ICD implantation using PEAK is safe and potentially beneficial in patients receiving OAC or APT with respect to prevention of bleeding complications. These results support the rationale for large prospective controlled trials evaluating a beneficial effect of PEAK use in S-ICD implantation procedures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kaya et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Patients undergoing implantation of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) (n=36). PEAK PlasmaBlade™ guided S-ICD implantation vs. Comparison between oral anticoagulation (OAC), antiplatelet therapy (APT), and neither was evaluated on Periprocedural safety endpoints comprising major complications including pocket hematomas, wound infections, bleeding (BARC ≥2) or events requiring interventions. PEAK PlasmaBlade-guided S-ICD implantation resulted in no differences in major perioperative complications among patients receiving oral anticoagulation, antiplatelet therapy, or neither.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: