Ultrasound-Guided Venous Axillary Access Versus Standard Fluoroscopic Technique for Cardiac Lead Implantation

Vitali, Francesco; Malagù, Michele; Bianchi, Nicola; De Raffele, Martina; Manfrini, Marco; Gibiino, Federico; Boccadoro, Alberto; Azzolini, Giorgia; Balla, Cristina; Bertini, Matteo

doi:10.1016/j.jacep.2023.11.020

JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology

2024

DOI: 10.1016/j.jacep.2023.11.020

|View full text |Cite

Ultrasound-Guided Venous Axillary Access Versus Standard Fluoroscopic Technique for Cardiac Lead Implantation

Francesco Vitali,

Michele Malagù,

Nicola Bianchi

et al.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article4

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent4

Authors

Journals

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Ultrasound-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided axillary vein puncture for cardiac implantable electronic device implantation: a meta-analysis enrolling 1257 patients

Vetta,

Parlavecchio,

Wright

et al. 2024

J Interv Card Electrophysiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultrasound-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided axillary vein puncture for cardiac implantable electronic device implantation: a meta-analysis enrolling 1257 patients

Vetta,

Parlavecchio,

Wright

et al. 2024

J Interv Card Electrophysiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Caudal tilt ultrasound: Are things looking up for axillary vein access?

Thiyagarajah,

Lau

2024

Heart Rhythm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultrasound-guided vs. fluoro-guided axillary venous access for cardiac implantable electronic devices: a patient-based meta-analysis

Vitali,

Zuin,

Charles

et al. 2024

Europace

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aims The use of ultrasound (US)-guided venous puncture for cardiac pacing/defibrillation lead placement may minimize the risk of peri-procedural complications and radiation exposure. However, none of the published studies have been sufficiently powered to recommend this approach as the standard of care. We compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided axillary venous puncture (US-AVP) versus fluoroscopy-guided access for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) by performing an individual patient data meta-analysis based on previously published studies. Methods We conducted a thorough literature search encompassing longitudinal investigations (five randomized and one prospective studies) reporting data on Xray-guided and US-AVP for CIED procedures. The primary endpoint was to compare the safety of the two techniques. Secondary endpoints included the success rate of each technique, the necessity of switching to alternative methods, the time needed to obtain venous access, Xray exposure and the occurrence of peri-procedural complications. Results Six longitudinal eligible studies were identified including 700 patients (mean age 74.9 ±12.1 years, 68.4% males). The two approaches for venous cannulation showed a similar success rate. The use of a Xray guided approach significantly increased the risk of inadvertent arterial punctures (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 2.10-2.21, p=0.003), after adjustment for potential confounders. Conversely, an US-AVP approach reduces time to vascular access, radiation exposure and the number of attempts to vascular access. Conclusions The US-AVP enhances safety by reducing radiation exposure and time to vascular access while maintaining a low rate of major complications compared to the x-ray-guided approach.

show abstract

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.

Contact Info

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.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Ultrasound-Guided Venous Axillary Access Versus Standard Fluoroscopic Technique for Cardiac Lead Implantation

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Ultrasound-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided axillary vein puncture for cardiac implantable electronic device implantation: a meta-analysis enrolling 1257 patients

Ultrasound-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided axillary vein puncture for cardiac implantable electronic device implantation: a meta-analysis enrolling 1257 patients

Caudal tilt ultrasound: Are things looking up for axillary vein access?

Ultrasound-guided vs. fluoro-guided axillary venous access for cardiac implantable electronic devices: a patient-based meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About