Risk factors associated with clinically relevant pericardial effusion after primary cardiac implantable electronic device implantation.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology Pub Date : 2024-09-30 DOI:10.1111/jce.16442
Yangzhi Zhou, Saranda Haxha, Andrim Halili, Berit T Philbert, Olav W Nielsen, Ahmad Sajadieh, Lars Koeber, Gunnar H Gislason, Christian Torp-Pedersen, Casper N Bang
{"title":"Risk factors associated with clinically relevant pericardial effusion after primary cardiac implantable electronic device implantation.","authors":"Yangzhi Zhou, Saranda Haxha, Andrim Halili, Berit T Philbert, Olav W Nielsen, Ahmad Sajadieh, Lars Koeber, Gunnar H Gislason, Christian Torp-Pedersen, Casper N Bang","doi":"10.1111/jce.16442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Pericardial effusion, a known complication to implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), may cause life-threatening cardiac tamponade. Limited knowledge is available about risk factors for clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion. The aim is to identify the patient- and procedure-related risk factors associated with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A nationwide observational cohort study based on data on 55 121 patients from the Danish Pacemaker Register between 2000 and 2018. We defined a clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion related to the implantation if it occurred within 90 days after the primary CIED-procedure. Prespecified risk factors were analysed by multivariable logistic regression models to estimate the association with pericardial effusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 115 (0.21%) patients diagnosed with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion, with a median age of 75 years and 38.3% were females. Of these, 80.9% lead to a subsequent pericardiocentesis procedure. In adjusted logistic regression analysis, an increased risk of clinically relevant pericardial effusion was associated with female sex (OR:1.49 [95%CI: 1.03-2.16]), heart failure (OR:1.54 [95%CI: 1.06-2.23]), previous cardiac surgery (OR:1.63 [95%CI: 1.05-2.55]), CRT-device (OR:2.05 [95%CI: 1.23-3.41]), tertiary-centres (OR:1.8 [95%CI: 1.18-2.73]), increased procedural volume per year (>1000) (OR:1.85 [95%CI: 1.03-3.30]), indication of device-implantation (atrioventricular block) (OR:2.37 [95CI: 1.45-3.87]), and increasing number of leads implanted (two leads (OR:2.39 [95%CI: 1.43-4.00]), three leads (OR:4.77 [95%CI: 2.50-9.10])).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion is a rare complication after CIED-implantation in Denmark. This study reveals important patient- and procedure-related risk factors associated with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion.</p>","PeriodicalId":15178,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.16442","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Pericardial effusion, a known complication to implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), may cause life-threatening cardiac tamponade. Limited knowledge is available about risk factors for clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion. The aim is to identify the patient- and procedure-related risk factors associated with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion.

Method: A nationwide observational cohort study based on data on 55 121 patients from the Danish Pacemaker Register between 2000 and 2018. We defined a clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion related to the implantation if it occurred within 90 days after the primary CIED-procedure. Prespecified risk factors were analysed by multivariable logistic regression models to estimate the association with pericardial effusion.

Results: There were 115 (0.21%) patients diagnosed with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion, with a median age of 75 years and 38.3% were females. Of these, 80.9% lead to a subsequent pericardiocentesis procedure. In adjusted logistic regression analysis, an increased risk of clinically relevant pericardial effusion was associated with female sex (OR:1.49 [95%CI: 1.03-2.16]), heart failure (OR:1.54 [95%CI: 1.06-2.23]), previous cardiac surgery (OR:1.63 [95%CI: 1.05-2.55]), CRT-device (OR:2.05 [95%CI: 1.23-3.41]), tertiary-centres (OR:1.8 [95%CI: 1.18-2.73]), increased procedural volume per year (>1000) (OR:1.85 [95%CI: 1.03-3.30]), indication of device-implantation (atrioventricular block) (OR:2.37 [95CI: 1.45-3.87]), and increasing number of leads implanted (two leads (OR:2.39 [95%CI: 1.43-4.00]), three leads (OR:4.77 [95%CI: 2.50-9.10])).

Conclusion: Clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion is a rare complication after CIED-implantation in Denmark. This study reveals important patient- and procedure-related risk factors associated with clinically relevant procedural pericardial effusion.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
原发性心脏植入式电子设备植入术后临床相关心包积液的相关风险因素。
简介:心包积液是植入心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)的一种已知并发症,可能导致心脏填塞而危及生命。目前对临床相关手术心包积液风险因素的了解有限。本研究旨在确定与临床相关的手术性心包积液相关的患者和手术相关风险因素:一项全国范围的观察性队列研究,基于 2000 年至 2018 年间丹麦起搏器登记册中 55 121 例患者的数据。如果临床相关的程序性心包积液发生在主要 CIED 程序后 90 天内,我们将其定义为与植入相关的程序性心包积液。我们通过多变量逻辑回归模型分析了预设的风险因素,以估计与心包积液的关系:共有115名(0.21%)患者被确诊为临床相关的手术性心包积液,中位年龄为75岁,38.3%为女性。其中,80.9%的患者随后接受了心包穿刺术。在调整后的逻辑回归分析中,临床相关心包积液风险的增加与以下因素有关:女性(OR:1.49 [95%CI: 1.03-2.16])、心衰(OR:1.54 [95%CI: 1.06-2.23])、既往心脏手术(OR:1.63 [95%CI: 1.05-2.55])、CRT-设备(OR:2.05 [95%CI: 1.23-3.41])、三级中心(OR:1.8[95%CI:1.18-2.73])、每年手术量增加(>1000)(OR:1.85[95%CI:1.03-3.30])、设备植入指征(房室传导阻滞)(OR:2.37[95%CI:1.45-3.87])、植入导联数量增加(两导联(OR:2.39[95%CI:1.43-4.00])、三导联(OR:4.77[95%CI:2.50-9.10]):在丹麦,与临床相关的程序性心包积液是植入 CIED 后的罕见并发症。本研究揭示了与临床相关的程序性心包积液有关的重要患者和程序相关风险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
14.80%
发文量
433
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology (JCE) keeps its readership well informed of the latest developments in the study and management of arrhythmic disorders. Edited by Bradley P. Knight, M.D., and a distinguished international editorial board, JCE is the leading journal devoted to the study of the electrophysiology of the heart.
期刊最新文献
Assessment of palpitations in patients with frequent premature ventricular contractions. Body mass index as a determinant of scar formation post-AF ablation: Insights from DECAAF II. Efficacy and limitation of nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Frequency and Genotype-Dependence of intrinsic chronotropic insufficiency among patients with congenital long QT syndrome. Endocardial ablation of ganglionated plexus for the treatment of carotid sinus syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1