Vemuri Krishna Santosh, Parashar Nitin, Bootla Dinakar, Revaiah Pruthvi C, Kanabar Kewal, Nevali Krishna Prasad, Sharma Yash Paul, Kasinadhuni Ganesh, Panda Prashant
Department of Cardiology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, Chandigarh, India.
Department of Cardiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, New Delhi, India.
Egypt Heart J. 2020 Oct 20;72(1):71. doi: 10.1186/s43044-020-00102-z.
Vascular spasm is well known to occur in the arterial system. Central venous spasm during pacemaker implantation is uncommon with only a few cases reported from time to time. Sometimes, the venous spasms may not respond to nitroglycerine injections which requires a change of access site and undue discomfort for the patient.
A 72-year-old female patient with no prior comorbidities presented to us with recurrent dizziness on exertion and at rest. The electrocardiogram showed complete heart block, likely to be of sclerodegenerative etiology as the patient did not have any ischemic symptoms, also the electrocardiogram and echocardiogram did not show any evidence of ischemia. As part of the hospital protocol, a venogram was performed by giving intravenous diluted contrast (iohexol) through the left brachial vein, which showed good-sized axillary and subclavian veins. We attempted to cannulate the left axillary vein with a 16G needle using Seldinger technique, but the axillary vein could not be cannulated despite multiple attempts. We gave incremental boluses of intravenous nitroglycerine, despite that the left axillary vein could not be cannulated. Repeat intravenous contrast injection showed severe spasm of axillary and subclavian veins. Finally, the axillary vein was cannulated from the right side using anatomical landmarks and a pacemaker was implanted.
Venous spasm during device implantation although uncommon, it should be anticipated in patients with difficult cannulation to prevent inadvertent complications like pneumothorax and arterial injuries. Mild venous spasm may relieve with time but severe venous spasm may require a change of access site.
血管痉挛在动脉系统中很常见。起搏器植入过程中发生中心静脉痉挛并不常见,仅有少数病例偶尔被报道。有时,静脉痉挛可能对硝酸甘油注射无反应,这就需要更换穿刺部位,给患者带来不必要的不适。
一名72岁女性患者,既往无合并症,因活动及休息时反复头晕前来就诊。心电图显示完全性心脏传导阻滞,病因可能为硬化性退变,因为患者没有任何缺血症状,而且心电图和超声心动图也未显示任何缺血证据。按照医院常规流程,通过左肱静脉注射稀释后的静脉造影剂(碘海醇)进行静脉造影,显示腋静脉和锁骨下静脉管径良好。我们尝试使用Seldinger技术用16G针穿刺左腋静脉,但尽管多次尝试仍无法成功穿刺。我们静脉注射了递增剂量的硝酸甘油,尽管如此,左腋静脉仍无法穿刺成功。再次静脉注射造影剂显示腋静脉和锁骨下静脉严重痉挛。最后,利用解剖标志从右侧穿刺腋静脉并植入了起搏器。
器械植入过程中发生静脉痉挛虽然不常见,但对于穿刺困难的患者应有所预见, 以防止出现气胸和动脉损伤等意外并发症。轻度静脉痉挛可能会随时间缓解,但严重的静脉痉挛可能需要更换穿刺部位。