Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2026
Outcomes of Intravenous Normal Saline Infusion Pre-Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Versus No Infusion in Fasting.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Umair Muhammad Hanzla, Saidullah Shahab, Shabeer Sadaf, Daneyal Roha, Kumar Neha, Shetiya Priyanka, Siddiqi Hina Ahmed, Kumar Haresh, Bai Anjali, Mehmood Raja Sadam, Perveen Abida, Abdullah F N U, Malik Jahanzeb
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Venous puncture failure during cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation is a significant procedural challenge, particularly in fasting patients. Pre-procedural intravenous normal saline (NS) infusion may enhance venous filling and improve procedural outcomes, but evidence in this setting is limited.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Abbas Institute of Medical Sciences, including 2852 patients undergoing CIED implantation. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received intravenous NS infusion prior to the procedure (n = 1130) and those who did not (n = 1722). Baseline demographics, procedural details, and outcomes-including venous puncture failure, arterial puncture, site change, and acute kidney injury (AKI)-were compared.
RESULTS: The NS group demonstrated a significantly lower rate of venous puncture failure (4.6% vs. 8.9%, p < 0.001) and arterial puncture failure (1.6% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.03). AKI occurred less frequently in the NS group, although this difference was not statistically significant (1.8% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.09). Predictors of venous puncture failure included absence of NS infusion (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.5-3.0), BMI ≥ 30, and CKD. ROC analysis demonstrated good model discrimination (AUC = 0.81).
CONCLUSION: Pre-procedural NS infusion significantly improves venous puncture success in fasting patients undergoing CIED implantation.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Abbas Institute of Medical Sciences, including 2852 patients undergoing CIED implantation. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received intravenous NS infusion prior to the procedure (n = 1130) and those who did not (n = 1722). Baseline demographics, procedural details, and outcomes-including venous puncture failure, arterial puncture, site change, and acute kidney injury (AKI)-were compared.
RESULTS: The NS group demonstrated a significantly lower rate of venous puncture failure (4.6% vs. 8.9%, p < 0.001) and arterial puncture failure (1.6% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.03). AKI occurred less frequently in the NS group, although this difference was not statistically significant (1.8% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.09). Predictors of venous puncture failure included absence of NS infusion (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.5-3.0), BMI ≥ 30, and CKD. ROC analysis demonstrated good model discrimination (AUC = 0.81).
CONCLUSION: Pre-procedural NS infusion significantly improves venous puncture success in fasting patients undergoing CIED implantation.