RESUMO

Resumen El manejo perioperatorio de pacientes que requieren procedimientos en electrofisiología es desafiante, pues muchos de ellos tienen alto riesgo embólico de base y, a menudo, están en terapia anticoagulante oral. La decisión de continuar, interrumpir la anticoagulación oral o indicar terapia puente es controversial. Este artículo se propone generar recomendaciones basadas en la evidencia sobre el manejo perioperatorio de la anticoagulación de pacientes, quienes, por su riesgo embólico, requieren anticoagulación oral y serán llevados a implante de dispositivos de estimulación cardíaca o ablación de arritmias. Se ha efectuado una revisión sistemática siguiendo los criterios del protocolo PRISMA. La búsqueda se realizó en la base de datos MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Google Scholar, NICE, Epistemonikos y LILACS. Esta revisión sistemática incluyó guías de práctica clínica, revisiones sistemáticas de literatura y metáanalisis. Se actualizó la evidencia desde el 1.o de enero del 2014 hasta el 28 de febrero del 2022. Se tomaron como cuerpo de evidencia 3 guías de práctica clínica y 4 revisiones sistemáticas de literatura las cuales se calificaron con los instrumentos AGREE II y AMSTAR II, respectivamente. Se generan recomendaciones basadas en la evidencia usando la metodología GRADE, en las que se destaca que la anticoagulación oral con antagonistas de la vitamina K debe indicarse de forma ininterrumpida tanto para ablación de FA, como para implante de dispositivos y ablación de arritmias; no obstante, no hay mayor evidencia de la anticoagulación oral directa en el implante de dispositivos.

Abstract Perioperative management of patients undergoing electrophysiology procedures is challenging, as many of these patients have a high background embolic risk and are often on oral anticoagulant therapy. The decision to continue, discontinue oral anticoagulation, or indicate bridging therapy is controversial. This article aims to generate evidence-based recommendations on the perioperative management of anticoagulation in patients who, due to their embolic risk, require oral anticoagulation with and will undergo cardiac pacing device implantation or arrhythmia ablation. A systematic review has been carried out following the criteria of the PRISMA protocol. The search was performed in the MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Google Scholar, NICE, Epistemonikos and LILACS databases. This systematic review included clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews of the literature, and meta-analyses. The evidence was updated from January 1, 2014 to February 28, 2022. 3 CPG and 4 RSL were taken as a body of evidence, which were qualified with the AGREE II and AMSTAR II instruments, respectively. Evidence-based recommendations, using the GRADE methodology, are generated which highlight that oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists should be ordered continuously for both atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and device implantation, and continuously for DOAC in arrhythmia ablation; however, there is not much evidence on direct oral anticoagulation in device implantation.

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has generated serious repercussions on the health system, reducing the number of all cardiology procedures worldwide. OBJECTIVES: Describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the procedures performed by the electrophysiology department in a national referral center. METHODS: We made a retrospective review of our data base and we compared procedures made in the past 3 years since 2017-2019 with the procedures made in the 2020. We divided the procedures into two large groups: Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIED) related procedures and electrophysiological procedures (EP) which included conventional and complex ablations. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in all the procedures, the average of procedures performed in the last 3 previous years was 467, while in 2020, we performed only 319 (p = 0.01); this represents a reduction of 33.4% in the total number of procedures. There was no statistical difference regarding the CIED related procedures, the average of procedures in the past 3 previous years was 174, and in 2020 we performed 190 procedures (p = 0.46). Regarding the EP, the average of the past 3 previous years was 293, while in 2020, we performed only 129 procedures (p < 0.01). The reduction in the EP was 55.97%. The most affected months were April, May, and June. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic considerably affected the number of the procedures in our center, reducing it by 33.4%. The reduction of procedures fundamentally affected the ablations, with a reduction of 55.97%. The number of CIED related procedures was not affected.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Cardiac stimulation therapy has evolved significantly over the past 30 years. Currently, cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are the mainstream therapy for many potentially lethal heart conditions, such as advanced atrioventricular block or sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. Despite sometimes being lifesaving, the implant is surgical and therefore carries all the inevitable intrinsic risks. In the process of technology evolution, one of the most important factors is to make it safer for the patient. In the context of CIED implants, complications include accidental puncture of intrathoracic structures. Alternative strategies to intrathoracic subclavian vein puncture include cephalic vein dissection or axillary vein puncture, which can be guided by fluoroscopy, venography or, more recently, ultrasound. In this article, the authors analyse the state of the art of ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture using evidence from landmark studies in this field.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Infection is one of the most serious complications following surgical placement of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Infection prevention efforts are necessary in reducing CIED infectious outcomes. These devices, however, are commonly inserted in higher risk patients, which may explain the ongoing risk of surgical site infection (SSI) in this population. The rates of CIED infection and utilization vary widely in the literature. The definitions of infection may also vary between clinical definitions and the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) criteria. METHODS: The primary objective of this study was to review patient data to identify risk factors for infection and readmission after CIED placement at an academic medical center. The secondary objectives were to compare the rates of SSI identified by NHSN criteria compared to that obtained by applying clinical infection definitions. RESULTS: The overall rate of infection (SSI) was 1.9%, which was identical in both the clinical definition and NHSN reported data. The 30 day readmission rate and the 90 day readmission rate were 12.7% and 25.6% respectively with the most readmissions related to the patients' underlying medical conditions. A lower ejection fraction (EF) was identified as an independent risk factor for readmission, inpatient procedures, smoking and device infection were also significantly associated with readmission after CIED insertion.

Assuntos

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The clinical utility of sonication as an adjunctive diagnostic tool for the microbial diagnosis of cardiac implantable device-associated infections (CIDAIs) was investigated. METHODS: The implants of 83 subjects were investigated, 15 with a CIDAI and 68 without a clinical infection. Clinical data were analyzed prospectively and sonication fluid cultures (83 patients, 100%) and traditional cultures (31 patients, 37.4%) were performed RESULTS: Generator pocket infection and device-related endocarditis were found in 13 (86.7%) and four (26.7%) subjects, respectively. The mean numbers of previous technical complications and infections were higher in the infected patients compared to the non-infected patients (8 vs. 1, p<0.001; 2 vs. 0, p<0.031, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity for detecting CIDAI was 73.3% (11/15) and 48.5% (33/68) for sonication fluid culture, and 26.7% (4/15) and 100% (16/16) for traditional culture (p<0.001), respectively. A higher number of organisms were identified by sonication fluid than by tissue culture (58 vs. 4 specimens; p<0.001). The most frequent organisms cultured were Gram-positive cocci (66.1%), mainly coagulase-negative staphylococci (35.5%). Thirty-five (51.5%) non-infected subjects were considered colonized due to the positive identification of organisms exclusively through sonication fluid culture. CONCLUSIONS: Sonication fluid culture from the removed cardiac implants has the potential to improve the microbiological diagnosis of CIDAIs.

Assuntos