The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2014
Cardiac strangulation following epicardial pacemaker implantation: a rare pediatric complication.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Carreras Erick M, Duncan Walter J, Djurdjev Ognjenka, Campbell Andrew I M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was 2-fold: to determine the incidence of cardiac strangulation (CS) and to develop a clinical pathway to aid in the diagnosis and prognosis of CS. In <2 years, 2 cases of CS occurred in our institution, which caused much alarm and led to the study's objectives.
METHODS: All patients who underwent implantation of an epicardial pacemaker from January 1992 to March 2012 were included. There were no exclusion criteria. Health records were used to locate all subjects and gather all retrospective data. Prospectively, subjects without a chest radiograph from the previous 2 years were approached for imaging.
RESULTS: This study included 86 patients retrospectively, and 84 patients prospectively. There was a 2.3% incidence, and a 1.2% mortality, related to CS. A pattern of posterior looping of the ventricular lead was seen in radiographs of both CS-diagnosed patients. Five variables were significantly associated with an outcome of CS (P = .0153).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the 2 cases of CS were not caused by a lack of follow-up but by a lack of consistent imaging for diagnosis. This conclusion is supported by the 8 cases of CS found in the English-language literature. If the patient is age ≤6 months at the time of implantation, particular attention should be given to the placement of leads and follow-up.
METHODS: All patients who underwent implantation of an epicardial pacemaker from January 1992 to March 2012 were included. There were no exclusion criteria. Health records were used to locate all subjects and gather all retrospective data. Prospectively, subjects without a chest radiograph from the previous 2 years were approached for imaging.
RESULTS: This study included 86 patients retrospectively, and 84 patients prospectively. There was a 2.3% incidence, and a 1.2% mortality, related to CS. A pattern of posterior looping of the ventricular lead was seen in radiographs of both CS-diagnosed patients. Five variables were significantly associated with an outcome of CS (P = .0153).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the 2 cases of CS were not caused by a lack of follow-up but by a lack of consistent imaging for diagnosis. This conclusion is supported by the 8 cases of CS found in the English-language literature. If the patient is age ≤6 months at the time of implantation, particular attention should be given to the placement of leads and follow-up.