Ultrasound‐Guided Axillary Vein Puncture Versus Landmark‐Guided Approach for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Placement

ABSTRACT Introduction Ultrasound (US)‐guided axillary vein puncture is a safe and effective approach for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, and it is highly recommended by the current consensus document. However, only reports on small populations are available in the current...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pacing and clinical electrophysiology 2025-01, Vol.48 (1), p.9-20
Hauptverfasser: Perna, Francesco, Flore, Francesco, Telesca, Alessandro, Ruscio, Eleonora, Scacciavillani, Roberto, Bencardino, Gianluigi, Narducci, Maria Lucia, Pinnacchio, Gaetano, Pelargonio, Gemma
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:ABSTRACT Introduction Ultrasound (US)‐guided axillary vein puncture is a safe and effective approach for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, and it is highly recommended by the current consensus document. However, only reports on small populations are available in the current literature regarding the comparison of this technique with other traditional approaches (subclavian vein blind puncture and cephalic vein surgical cutdown). Purpose We aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of US‐ guided axillary vein puncture using a microintroducer kit for CIED implantation as compared to the aforementioned traditional approaches. Methods All consecutive patients with an indication to CIED implantation were prospectively enrolled in our observational study from March 2021 to July 2023. Patients were divided into three groups based on venous access route, according to the operator's preference: cephalic vein surgical cutdown (G1), US‐guided axillary vein puncture (G2), and subclavian vein blind puncture (G3). Clinical and procedural characteristics, success and complication rates were considered for analysis. Results A total of 1000 patients (65.2% male, mean age 75.5 ± 10.8 years) were enrolled. Cephalic vein surgical cutdown was chosen in 172 (G1, 17.2%), US‐guided axillary access in 433 patients (G2, 43.3%), and subclavian vein in 395 (G3, 39.5%). Success rate was 77.6% in G1, 96.3% in G2, and 97.2% in G3 (G2 vs. G3, p = 0.5; G1 vs. G2, p 
ISSN:0147-8389
1540-8159
1540-8159
DOI:10.1111/pace.15107