Teruya Theodore H, Abou-Zamzam Ahmed M, Limm Whitney, Wong Linda, Wong Livingston
Division of Vascular Surgery, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA 92354, USA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2003 Sep;17(5):526-9. doi: 10.1007/s10016-003-0048-4. Epub 2003 Sep 10.
The objective of this study was to determine the incidence and timing of complications associated with ipsilateral transvenous pacemakers and hemodialysis access, including subclavian vein stenosis and occlusion, and assess their impact on dialysis access patency. All patients who had pacemakers placed at St. Francis Medical Center were reviewed during the 10-year period from 1988 to 1998. Patients requiring chronic hemodialysis were identified and their demographic data, the presence of arm swelling, and fistula patency were noted. Development of subclavian vein stenosis and occlusion was documented by venography in symptomatic patients. The ultimate outcome of dialysis access was recorded. During the 10-year period 495 patients had transvenous pacemakers placed. Twenty patients were identified with renal failure requiring hemodialysis and 14 had hemodialysis access in the extremity ipsilateral to the pacemaker. Ten (10/14, 71%) patients developed symptoms of subclavian stenosis, including venous hypertension, high recirculation rate, arm swelling, pain, and neurologic symptoms. Eighty percent (8/10) of symptomatic patients had subclavian vein occlusion. All 10 symptomatic patients required ligation of the hemodialysis access to control symptoms. The four asymptomatic patients expired within 6 months of placement of the pacemaker or hemodialysis access from unrelated causes. There is a high incidence of complications in patients who have ipsilateral pacemakers and hemodialysis access. The presence of pacemaker electrodes in the subclavian vein and the flow associated with hemodialysis may accelerate the occurrence of subclavian venous stenosis and occlusion. Patients who did not develop symptoms may have expired before venous outflow obstruction could develop. Vascular surgeons and cardiac surgeons/cardiologists need to coordinate their procedures to avoid ipsilateral transvenous pacemakers and hemodialysis access.
本研究的目的是确定与同侧经静脉起搏器和血液透析通路相关并发症的发生率和发生时间,包括锁骨下静脉狭窄和闭塞,并评估它们对透析通路通畅性的影响。对1988年至1998年这10年间在圣弗朗西斯医疗中心植入起搏器的所有患者进行了回顾。确定需要慢性血液透析的患者,并记录他们的人口统计学数据、手臂肿胀情况以及动静脉内瘘的通畅性。有症状的患者通过静脉造影记录锁骨下静脉狭窄和闭塞的发生情况。记录透析通路的最终结局。在这10年期间,有495例患者植入了经静脉起搏器。确定有20例患者患有肾衰竭需要血液透析,其中14例在起搏器同侧的肢体建立了血液透析通路。10例(10/14,71%)患者出现了锁骨下狭窄的症状,包括静脉高压、高再循环率、手臂肿胀、疼痛和神经症状。80%(8/10)有症状的患者出现了锁骨下静脉闭塞。所有10例有症状的患者都需要结扎血液透析通路以控制症状。4例无症状的患者在植入起搏器或血液透析通路后的6个月内死于无关原因。同侧有起搏器和血液透析通路的患者并发症发生率很高。锁骨下静脉内起搏器电极的存在以及与血液透析相关的血流可能会加速锁骨下静脉狭窄和闭塞的发生。未出现症状的患者可能在静脉流出道梗阻发生之前就已经死亡。血管外科医生和心脏外科医生/心脏病专家需要协调他们的操作,以避免同侧经静脉起搏器和血液透析通路。