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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chun, Kwang Jin, Gwag, Hye Bin, Hwang, Jin Kyung, Park, Seung-Jung, On, Young Keun, Kim, June Soo, Park, Kyoung-Min
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