Costea Alexandru, Rardon David P, Padanilam Benzy J, Fogel Richard I, Prystowsky Eric N
Department of Cardiology, The Care Group, St. Vincent Hospital, Indianapolis, Indiana 46260, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2008 Mar;19(3):266-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2007.01047.x. Epub 2007 Dec 12.
Device recalls create problems for patients and physicians, for the risks associated with replacement may be greater than the device failure rate. In 2005, Medtronic, Guidant, and St. Jude had implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recalls on several of their devices. There were no national standards to guide physicians on the management of such patients. We report the reasons for and outcomes of ICD and pacemaker generator changes from our practice resulting from these advisories.
After an advisory was issued, the patients with an affected device were contacted, evaluated in the office by one of the electrophysiologists in our group, and a management plan was determined. Two hundred and twenty-two of 1,039 (Medtronic 273, Guidant 766) (21.4%) patients with advisory devices underwent device replacement. Nine minor complications occurred: hematoma managed conservatively (n = 6); local discomfort (n = 1); and incisional infections treated successfully with oral antibiotics (n = 2). Major complications occurred in nine patients (4.1%). Four atrial leads were damaged, two of which were repaired, one during the same procedure and the other at a later date. One patient required a reoperation to tighten a loose ventricular lead set screw. Hematoma requiring evacuation occurred in one patient, and pocket revision was necessary in two patients secondary to severe discomfort due to the positioning of the device in the pocket. One patient had a cerebrovascular accident preoperatively. There were no perioperative deaths or infections requiring system removal.
Even with experienced operators complications can occur when replacing generators for a device recall. Careful risk assessment for each individual patient should be performed and efforts made to minimize generator changes.
设备召回给患者和医生带来了问题,因为与更换相关的风险可能大于设备故障率。2005年,美敦力公司、Guidant公司和圣犹达医疗用品公司召回了其多款植入式心脏除颤器(ICD)。当时没有国家标准来指导医生管理此类患者。我们报告了因这些咨询而在我们的实践中进行ICD和起搏器发生器更换的原因及结果。
发布咨询后,联系了受影响设备的患者,由我们团队的一名电生理学家在办公室进行评估,并确定管理计划。1039名(美敦力273名,Guidant 766名)使用咨询设备的患者中有222名(21.4%)接受了设备更换。发生了9例轻微并发症:6例血肿经保守治疗;1例局部不适;2例切口感染经口服抗生素成功治疗。9名患者(4.1%)发生了严重并发症。4根心房导线受损,其中2根进行了修复,1根在同一手术中修复,另1根在稍后修复。1名患者需要再次手术以拧紧松动的心室导线固定螺钉。1名患者发生需要引流的血肿,2名患者因设备在囊袋中的位置导致严重不适而需要进行囊袋翻修。1名患者术前发生脑血管意外。没有围手术期死亡或需要移除整个系统的感染。
即使有经验丰富的操作人员,在因设备召回而更换发生器时仍可能发生并发症。应针对每位患者进行仔细的风险评估,并努力尽量减少发生器更换。