The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a dramatic impact on the way that medical care is delivered. To minimise hospital attendance by both patients and staff, remote clinics, meetings and investigations have been used. Technologies including hand-held ECG monitoring using smartphones, patch ECG monitoring and sending out conventional Holter monitors have aided remote investigations. Platforms such as Google Meet and Zoom have allowed remote multidisciplinary meetings to be delivered effectively. The use of phone consultations has allowed outpatient care to continue despite the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a radical, and probably permanent, change in the way that outpatient care is delivered. Previous experience in remote review and the available technologies for monitoring have allowed the majority of outpatient care to be conducted without obviously compromising quality or safety.
Background: Conventional superior access for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is not always possible and femoral CIEDs (F-CIED) are an alternative option when leadless systems are not suitable. The long-term outcomes and extraction experiences with F-CIEDs, in particular complex F-CIED (ICD/CRT devices), remain poorly understood.Methods: Patients referred for F-CIEDs implantation between 2002 and 2019 at two tertiary centers were included. Early complications were defined as ≤30 days following implant and late complications >30 days.Results: Thirty-one patients (66% male; age 56 ± 20 years; 35% [11] patients with congenital heart disease) were implanted with F-CIEDs (10 ICD/CRT and 21 pacemakers).Early complications were observed in 6.5% of patients: two lead displacements. Late complications at 6.8 ± 4.4 years occurred in 29.0% of patients. This was higher with complex F-CIED compared to simple F-CIED (60.0% vs. 14.3%, p = .02). Late complications were predominantly generator site related (n = 8, 25.8%) including seven infections/erosions and one generator migration. Eight femoral generators and 14 leads (median duration in situ seven [range 6-11] years) were extracted without complication.Conclusions: Procedural success with F-CIEDs is high with clinically acceptable early complication rates. There is a notable risk of late complications, particularly involving the generator site of complex devices following repeat femoral procedures. Extraction of chronic F-CIED in experienced centers is feasible and safe.
Background Recognizing the etiology of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) has an enormous impact on the management of victims and their immediate families. A significant proportion of SCA survivors with a structurally normal heart are not offered a diagnosis and there is no clear consensus on the type and duration of follow‐up. We aimed to assess the utility of a multidisciplinary approach in optimizing diagnosis of cardiac arrest etiology during follow‐up. Methods and Results We retrospectively assessed 327 consecutive SCA survivors (mean age 61.9±16.2 years, 80% men) who underwent secondary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators between May 2015 and November 2018. The initial diagnosis was recorded at the time of admission and follow‐up diagnosis was deduced from subsequent clinic records, investigations, and outcomes of multidisciplinary team meetings. Structural heart disease accounted for 282 (86%) of SCAs. Forty‐five (14%) patients had a structurally normal heart and underwent comprehensive testing and follow‐up (mean duration 93±52 weeks). On initial evaluation, 14/45 (31%) of these received a diagnosis, rising to 29/45 (64%) with serial reviews during follow‐up. Discussion in multidisciplinary team meetings and imaging reassessment accounted for 47% of new diagnoses. No additional diagnoses were made beyond 96 weeks. Nineteen (5.8%) fatalities occurred in the entire cohort, exclusively in patients with structural heart disease. Conclusions Systematic comprehensive testing combined with multidisciplinary expert team review of SCA survivors without structural heart disease improves the yield and time to diagnosis compared with previously published studies. This approach has positive implications in the management of SCA survivors and their families.
Aims The SMART Pass™ (SP) algorithm is a high-pass filter that aims to reduce inappropriate therapy (IT) in subcutaneous internal cardiac defibrillator (S-ICD), but SP can deactivate due to low amplitude sensed R waves or asystole. The association between IT and SP deactivation and management strategies were evaluated, hypothesizing SP deactivation increases the risk of IT and device re-programming, or lead/generator re-positioning could reduce this risk. Methods and results Retrospective single-centre audit of Emblem™ S-ICD devices implanted 2016 to 2020 utilizing health records and remote monitoring data. Cox regression models evaluated associations between SP deactivation and IT. A total of 348 patients (27 ± 16.6 months follow-up) were studied: 73% primary prevention. Thirty-eight patients (11.8%) received 83 shocks with 27 patients (7.8%) receiving a total of 44 IT. Causes of IT were oversensing (98%) and aberrantly conducted atrial fibrillation (2%). SP deactivation occurred in 32 of 348 patients (9%) and was significantly associated with increased risk of IT (hazard ratio 5.36, 95% CI 2.37-12.13). SP deactivation was due to low amplitude R waves (94%), associated with a higher defibrillation threshold at implant and presence of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. No further IT occurred 16 ± 15.5 months after corrective interventions, with changing the sensing vector being successful in 59% of cases. Conclusion To reduce the risk of IT, the cause of the SP deactivation should be investigated, and appropriate reprogramming, device, or lead modifications made. Utilizing the alert for SP deactivation and electrograms could pro-actively prevent IT.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.