Permanent pacemaker lead implantation via azygous vein in a patient with silent superior vena cava syndrome

Göktekín, Ömer; Besoglu, Yavuz; Dogan, Sait Mesut; Birdane, Alparslan; Ünalır, Ahmet; Görenek, Bülent; Kudaiberdieva, Gulmira; Çavuşoğlu, Yüksel; Ata, Necmi; Aslan, Recep; Timuralp, Bilgin

doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.07.171

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4 Goktekin et al have reported a case of permanent pacemaker lead implantation via the azygous vein in a patient with silent SVC syndrome. 5 Fishberger et al have reported a patient who underwent CIED implantation using a percutaneous transhepatic approach. 6 Several limitations and complications have been reported with use of the transhepatic approach (in a previous single-center study describing 124 procedures, 10 major complications have been approach.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two Cases of Transhepatic Implantation of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device: All Roads lead to Rome

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lead insertion for cardiac implantable electronic devices requires venous access into the right side of the heart. The access route commonly used is from the axillary vein, through the subclavian vein and the superior vena cava. However, in patients with congenital heart malformations or those with vascular stenosis, and/or those who have undergone previous cardiac surgery, the passage of leads might be difficult, and the implantation procedure would show restricted scope. In such cases, insertion of leads through the hepatic vein is known to be a safe procedure. We report 2 cases of patients with limited vascular access who underwent lead implantation using the transhepatic approach-1 patient who underwent placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator and the other who underwent placement of a permanent pacemaker.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two Cases of Transhepatic Implantation of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device: All Roads lead to Rome

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous practises have utilised the saphenous vein or the superficial femoral vein [9] whereas transfemoral and transiliac approaches have also been described [24]. One must however bear in mind both the general complications of CPB as well as specific complications including pericardial tamponade, haemothorax or pneumothorax, thrombo-embolism, peripheral lead escape or wound infection.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical management of superior vena cava syndrome following pacemaker lead infection: a case report and review of the literature

Kokotsakis

Chaudhry

Tassopoulos

et al. 2014

J Cardiothorac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome is a known but rare complication of pacemaker lead implantation, accounting for approximately less than 0.5% of cases. Its pathophysiology is due to either infection or endothelial mechanical stress, causing inflammation and fibrosis leading to thrombosis, and therefore stenosis of the SVC. Due to the various risks including thrombo-embolic complications and the need to provide symptomatic relief, medical and surgical interventions are sought early. We present the case of a 48-year Caucasian male who presented with localised swelling and pain at the site of pacemaker implantation. Inflammatory markers were normal, but diagnostic imaging revealed three masses along the pacemaker lead passage. A surgical approach using cardiopulmonary bypass and circulatory arrest was used to remove the vegetations. Culture from the vegetations showed Staphylococcus epidermidis. The technique presented here allowed for safe and effective removal of both the thrombus and infected pacing leads, with excellent exposure and minimal post-procedure complications.

show abstract

“…Other modes of implantation that have been described by several authors, e.g. through the azygos vein [ 1 , 2 ], the inferior vena cava [ 3 ], a femoral vein and the iliac vein [ 4 , 5 ], entail a potentially greater possibility of rupture or injury to the whole system. They also impose some restrictions on the physical activities of patients with a pacemaker implanted using these methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implantation of VVI epicardial pacemaker through mini-sternotomy in a patient with superior vena cava occlusion after radiotherapy

Bartczak

Ammer

Bartczak

et al. 2014

kitp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents a case report of a patient with a superior vena cava occlusion and post-operational (after the implantation of the aortic valve) atrioventricular block, which required constant stimulation. An epicardial VVI pacemaker was implanted through mini-sternotomy in the lower part of the previous operation field with very satisfactory stimulation parameters. Implantation of a screw-in epicardial lead is in some cases the method of choice, which provides efficient and constant heart stimulation.

show abstract

Permanent pacemaker lead implantation via azygous vein in a patient with silent superior vena cava syndrome

Cited by 9 publications

References 12 publications

Two Cases of Transhepatic Implantation of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device: All Roads lead to Rome

Two Cases of Transhepatic Implantation of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device: All Roads lead to Rome

Surgical management of superior vena cava syndrome following pacemaker lead infection: a case report and review of the literature

Implantation of VVI epicardial pacemaker through mini-sternotomy in a patient with superior vena cava occlusion after radiotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About