- Email: [email protected]
TWO INCISION VERSUS THREE INCISION PROCEDURE TIMES FOR IMPLANTATION OF SUBCUTANEOUS IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS: A TWO CENTER EXPERIENCE
823 JACC April 5, 2016 Volume 67, Issue 13
Arrhythmias and Clinical EP TWO INCISION VERSUS THREE INCISION PROCEDURE TIMES FOR IMPLANTATION OF SUBCUTANEOUS IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS: A TWO CENTER EXPERIENCE Poster Contributions Poster Area, South Hall A1 Sunday, April 03, 2016, 3:45 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Session Title: Insights Into New Therapies in Electrophysiology and Devices Abstract Category: 18. Arrhythmias and Clinical EP: Devices Presentation Number: 1233-331 Authors: Christina Dookhan, Abhijit Ghatak, Santosh Padala, Rizwan Alimohammad, David Steckman, Henry Tan, James O’Brien, Mandeep Sidhu, Assaf Tzur, Ivan Mendoza, Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL, USA, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA
Background: Traditionally, the three incision technique had been used for device and electrode implantation for subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (sICDs). The 2 incision technique obviates the superior parasternal incision, which can be a source of discomfort and infection. Currently data on comparison of procedure times between these 2 techniques is lacking.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all consecutive patients at 2 major tertiary centers who had sICD implantation with Class Ia or II indications for ICD without need for pacing from January 2014 to March 2015. Data on age, gender, ejection fraction (EF),procedural times of 2 incision and 3 incision techniques and peri and post procedure complications including death, new onset atrial fibrillation, pocket hematomas, wound dehiscence and superficial wound infection were collected. Results: Thirty seven patients (40.5% females, mean age 52± 16 years, mean EF 30± 15%) had sICDs implanted. The mean procedure time for patients undergoing 2- incision technique( n=8) was significantly lower than that of the 3- incision technique (80.5± 50 mins versus 126.6± 32.8 mins respectively, p<0.007). Complication rates for death, new onset atrial fibrillation, wound dehiscence and wound infection with 2 vs 3 incision technique were not significantly different 0%( 0/8) vs 3.44% (1/29), p=0.59 with rates of 0% (0/8) vs 10.3% (3/29), p= 0.34 for pocket hematoma. Conclusions: The 2 incision technique is associated with a shorter procedure time compared with the 3 incision technique for sICD implantation.
Arrhythmias and Clinical EP TWO INCISION VERSUS THREE INCISION PROCEDURE TIMES FOR IMPLANTATION OF SUBCUTANEOUS IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS: A TWO CENTER EXPERIENCE Poster Contributions Poster Area, South Hall A1 Sunday, April 03, 2016, 3:45 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Session Title: Insights Into New Therapies in Electrophysiology and Devices Abstract Category: 18. Arrhythmias and Clinical EP: Devices Presentation Number: 1233-331 Authors: Christina Dookhan, Abhijit Ghatak, Santosh Padala, Rizwan Alimohammad, David Steckman, Henry Tan, James O’Brien, Mandeep Sidhu, Assaf Tzur, Ivan Mendoza, Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL, USA, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA
Background: Traditionally, the three incision technique had been used for device and electrode implantation for subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (sICDs). The 2 incision technique obviates the superior parasternal incision, which can be a source of discomfort and infection. Currently data on comparison of procedure times between these 2 techniques is lacking.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all consecutive patients at 2 major tertiary centers who had sICD implantation with Class Ia or II indications for ICD without need for pacing from January 2014 to March 2015. Data on age, gender, ejection fraction (EF),procedural times of 2 incision and 3 incision techniques and peri and post procedure complications including death, new onset atrial fibrillation, pocket hematomas, wound dehiscence and superficial wound infection were collected. Results: Thirty seven patients (40.5% females, mean age 52± 16 years, mean EF 30± 15%) had sICDs implanted. The mean procedure time for patients undergoing 2- incision technique( n=8) was significantly lower than that of the 3- incision technique (80.5± 50 mins versus 126.6± 32.8 mins respectively, p<0.007). Complication rates for death, new onset atrial fibrillation, wound dehiscence and wound infection with 2 vs 3 incision technique were not significantly different 0%( 0/8) vs 3.44% (1/29), p=0.59 with rates of 0% (0/8) vs 10.3% (3/29), p= 0.34 for pocket hematoma. Conclusions: The 2 incision technique is associated with a shorter procedure time compared with the 3 incision technique for sICD implantation.