The Israel Medical Association journal : IMAJ · 2025
Implanting Cardiac Electronic Devices with Uninterrupted Antithrombotic Therapy: A Novel Approach to Reduce Pocket Hematoma.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Laish-Farkash Avishag, Yahud Ella, Rahkovich Michael, Kogan Yonatan, Vasilenko Lubov, Harari Emanuel, Marincheva Gergana, Shvets Emma, Lev Eli I, Farkash Uri
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Uninterrupted antithrombotic treatment (ATT) during cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation increases bleeding and device-related infections (DRI) risk. The wide-awake-local-anesthesia-no-tourniquet (WALANT) technique, using large-volume local anesthesia and adrenaline, is successful in hand surgeries but its potential to mitigate bleeding risk in CIED implantations remains unknown.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether WALANT protocol for CIED implantations reduces clinically significant pocket hematoma in patients with a high bleeding risk or is a contraindication for interrupting ATT.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial with CIED surgery patients on uninterrupted ATT. They received WALANT protocol (lidocaine 1% with adrenaline 1:100,000) or standard protocol (lidocaine 1%). Following implantation, patients were blindly monitored in the ward and pacemaker clinic. Patients were monitored for bleeding outcomes post-implantation.
RESULTS: Forty-six consecutive patients (73.6 ± 9 years, 72% male) were enrolled. In the WALANT group (n=24) no intra-pocket pro-hemostatic agents were needed, compared to 45% in the control group (P = 0.0002). Postoperative pressure dressings were used in 12.5% vs. 68% (P = 0.0002). WALANT patients had smaller hematoma areas (median 3.7 cm2 IQR [1-39] vs. 46 cm2 [IQR 24-76], P = 0.0004) 1-day postoperative. ATT interruption occurred in 12.5% vs. 18% (P = 0.7). Superficial skin infection rates were 4% vs. 9% (P = 0.6). No DRI occurred. No WALANT-related side effects were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: WALANT protocol in CIED implantation with uninterrupted ATT reduced pro-hemostatic agents, pressure-dressing need, and hematoma size. Larger studies are needed to assess its impact on infection rates.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether WALANT protocol for CIED implantations reduces clinically significant pocket hematoma in patients with a high bleeding risk or is a contraindication for interrupting ATT.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial with CIED surgery patients on uninterrupted ATT. They received WALANT protocol (lidocaine 1% with adrenaline 1:100,000) or standard protocol (lidocaine 1%). Following implantation, patients were blindly monitored in the ward and pacemaker clinic. Patients were monitored for bleeding outcomes post-implantation.
RESULTS: Forty-six consecutive patients (73.6 ± 9 years, 72% male) were enrolled. In the WALANT group (n=24) no intra-pocket pro-hemostatic agents were needed, compared to 45% in the control group (P = 0.0002). Postoperative pressure dressings were used in 12.5% vs. 68% (P = 0.0002). WALANT patients had smaller hematoma areas (median 3.7 cm2 IQR [1-39] vs. 46 cm2 [IQR 24-76], P = 0.0004) 1-day postoperative. ATT interruption occurred in 12.5% vs. 18% (P = 0.7). Superficial skin infection rates were 4% vs. 9% (P = 0.6). No DRI occurred. No WALANT-related side effects were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: WALANT protocol in CIED implantation with uninterrupted ATT reduced pro-hemostatic agents, pressure-dressing need, and hematoma size. Larger studies are needed to assess its impact on infection rates.