Cargando…
Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach?
Temporary pacemakers (TPMs) are usually inserted in an emergency situation. However, there are few reports available regarding which route of access is best or what the most preferred approach is currently in tertiary hospitals. This study aimed to compare procedure times, complication rates, and in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7217466/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32396565 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233129 |
_version_ | 1783532604139503616 |
---|---|
author | Chun, Kwang Jin Gwag, Hye Bin Hwang, Jin Kyung Park, Seung-Jung On, Young Keun Kim, June Soo Park, Kyoung-Min |
author_facet | Chun, Kwang Jin Gwag, Hye Bin Hwang, Jin Kyung Park, Seung-Jung On, Young Keun Kim, June Soo Park, Kyoung-Min |
author_sort | Chun, Kwang Jin |
collection | PubMed |
description | Temporary pacemakers (TPMs) are usually inserted in an emergency situation. However, there are few reports available regarding which route of access is best or what the most preferred approach is currently in tertiary hospitals. This study aimed to compare procedure times, complication rates, and indications for temporary pacing between the transjugular and transfemoral approaches to TPM placement. We analyzed consecutive patients who underwent TPM placement. Indications; procedure times; and rates of complications including localized infection, any bleeding, and pacing wire repositioning rates were analyzed. A total of 732 patients (361 treated via the transjugular approach and 371 treated via the transfemoral approach) were included. Complete atrioventricular block was the most common cause of TPM placement in both groups, but sick sinus syndrome was especially common in the transjugular approach group. Separately, procedure time was significantly shorter in the transjugular approach group (9.0 ± 8.0 minutes vs. 11.9 ± 9.7 minutes; P < 0.001). Overall complication rates were not significantly different between the two groups, and longer duration of temporary pacing was a risk factor for repositioning. The risk of reposition was significantly increased when the temporary pacing was continued more than 5 days and 3 days in the transjugular approach group and the transfemoral approach group, respectively. The transjugular approach should be considered if the TPM is required for more than 3 days. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7217466 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72174662020-05-29 Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach? Chun, Kwang Jin Gwag, Hye Bin Hwang, Jin Kyung Park, Seung-Jung On, Young Keun Kim, June Soo Park, Kyoung-Min PLoS One Research Article Temporary pacemakers (TPMs) are usually inserted in an emergency situation. However, there are few reports available regarding which route of access is best or what the most preferred approach is currently in tertiary hospitals. This study aimed to compare procedure times, complication rates, and indications for temporary pacing between the transjugular and transfemoral approaches to TPM placement. We analyzed consecutive patients who underwent TPM placement. Indications; procedure times; and rates of complications including localized infection, any bleeding, and pacing wire repositioning rates were analyzed. A total of 732 patients (361 treated via the transjugular approach and 371 treated via the transfemoral approach) were included. Complete atrioventricular block was the most common cause of TPM placement in both groups, but sick sinus syndrome was especially common in the transjugular approach group. Separately, procedure time was significantly shorter in the transjugular approach group (9.0 ± 8.0 minutes vs. 11.9 ± 9.7 minutes; P < 0.001). Overall complication rates were not significantly different between the two groups, and longer duration of temporary pacing was a risk factor for repositioning. The risk of reposition was significantly increased when the temporary pacing was continued more than 5 days and 3 days in the transjugular approach group and the transfemoral approach group, respectively. The transjugular approach should be considered if the TPM is required for more than 3 days. Public Library of Science 2020-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7217466/ /pubmed/32396565 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233129 Text en © 2020 Chun et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chun, Kwang Jin Gwag, Hye Bin Hwang, Jin Kyung Park, Seung-Jung On, Young Keun Kim, June Soo Park, Kyoung-Min Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach? |
title | Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach? |
title_full | Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach? |
title_fullStr | Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach? |
title_short | Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach? |
title_sort | is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach? |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7217466/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32396565 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233129 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chunkwangjin istransjugularinsertionofatemporarypacemakerasafeandeffectiveapproach AT gwaghyebin istransjugularinsertionofatemporarypacemakerasafeandeffectiveapproach AT hwangjinkyung istransjugularinsertionofatemporarypacemakerasafeandeffectiveapproach AT parkseungjung istransjugularinsertionofatemporarypacemakerasafeandeffectiveapproach AT onyoungkeun istransjugularinsertionofatemporarypacemakerasafeandeffectiveapproach AT kimjunesoo istransjugularinsertionofatemporarypacemakerasafeandeffectiveapproach AT parkkyoungmin istransjugularinsertionofatemporarypacemakerasafeandeffectiveapproach |