Cargando…

A case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava

BACKGROUND : Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) can occur in up to 9% of patients having a pacemaker. Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy can be treated by upgrade to a biventricular pacemaker with a left ventricular (LV) lead implantation. The procedure can be technically challenging in patients...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abdalwahid, Kawan Fadhil, Chu, Gavin S, Nicolson, William B
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7180554/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32352067
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjcr/ytaa015
_version_ 1783525846075572224
author Abdalwahid, Kawan Fadhil
Chu, Gavin S
Nicolson, William B
author_facet Abdalwahid, Kawan Fadhil
Chu, Gavin S
Nicolson, William B
author_sort Abdalwahid, Kawan Fadhil
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND : Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) can occur in up to 9% of patients having a pacemaker. Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy can be treated by upgrade to a biventricular pacemaker with a left ventricular (LV) lead implantation. The procedure can be technically challenging in patients with persistent left-sided superior vena cava (PLSVC). CASE SUMMARY : We report the case of a 72-year-old gentleman with a PLSVC, who had a dual-chamber pacemaker implanted 15 years ago for complete heart block. After 12 years of good health, the gentleman developed breathlessness due to PICM. At upgrade to biventricular pacemaker, his coronary sinus was found to be occluded and a collateral branch was used to successfully position an LV lead. Marked clinical improvement was seen before representation with syncope after 2 years due to simultaneous failure of both LV and right ventricular leads. Subsequently, a right-sided de novo biventricular pacemaker was implanted. In this instance, the PLSVC was beneficial because it isolated the existing leads from the new implant, thereby reducing the risk of SVC obstruction. DISCUSSION : Although implantation of pacemaker leads through a PLSVC constitutes a challenging procedure due to manoeuvring difficulties of the pacing leads into the cardiac chambers, in this particular case, the presence of PLSVC was beneficial because it meant that no leads were present in the true SVC, reducing the risk of occlusion and avoiding the need for lead extraction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7180554
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71805542020-04-29 A case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava Abdalwahid, Kawan Fadhil Chu, Gavin S Nicolson, William B Eur Heart J Case Rep Case Report BACKGROUND : Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) can occur in up to 9% of patients having a pacemaker. Pacemaker-induced cardiomyopathy can be treated by upgrade to a biventricular pacemaker with a left ventricular (LV) lead implantation. The procedure can be technically challenging in patients with persistent left-sided superior vena cava (PLSVC). CASE SUMMARY : We report the case of a 72-year-old gentleman with a PLSVC, who had a dual-chamber pacemaker implanted 15 years ago for complete heart block. After 12 years of good health, the gentleman developed breathlessness due to PICM. At upgrade to biventricular pacemaker, his coronary sinus was found to be occluded and a collateral branch was used to successfully position an LV lead. Marked clinical improvement was seen before representation with syncope after 2 years due to simultaneous failure of both LV and right ventricular leads. Subsequently, a right-sided de novo biventricular pacemaker was implanted. In this instance, the PLSVC was beneficial because it isolated the existing leads from the new implant, thereby reducing the risk of SVC obstruction. DISCUSSION : Although implantation of pacemaker leads through a PLSVC constitutes a challenging procedure due to manoeuvring difficulties of the pacing leads into the cardiac chambers, in this particular case, the presence of PLSVC was beneficial because it meant that no leads were present in the true SVC, reducing the risk of occlusion and avoiding the need for lead extraction. Oxford University Press 2020-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7180554/ /pubmed/32352067 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjcr/ytaa015 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Case Report
Abdalwahid, Kawan Fadhil
Chu, Gavin S
Nicolson, William B
A case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava
title A case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava
title_full A case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava
title_fullStr A case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava
title_full_unstemmed A case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava
title_short A case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava
title_sort case report: upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy with a blocked persistent left-sided superior vena cava
topic Case Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7180554/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32352067
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjcr/ytaa015
work_keys_str_mv AT abdalwahidkawanfadhil acasereportupgradetocardiacresynchronizationtherapywithablockedpersistentleftsidedsuperiorvenacava
AT chugavins acasereportupgradetocardiacresynchronizationtherapywithablockedpersistentleftsidedsuperiorvenacava
AT nicolsonwilliamb acasereportupgradetocardiacresynchronizationtherapywithablockedpersistentleftsidedsuperiorvenacava
AT abdalwahidkawanfadhil casereportupgradetocardiacresynchronizationtherapywithablockedpersistentleftsidedsuperiorvenacava
AT chugavins casereportupgradetocardiacresynchronizationtherapywithablockedpersistentleftsidedsuperiorvenacava
AT nicolsonwilliamb casereportupgradetocardiacresynchronizationtherapywithablockedpersistentleftsidedsuperiorvenacava