Search

Background: Pectoral nerve (PECs) blocks are established regional anesthesia techniques that can provide analgesia to the anterior chest wall. Although commonly performed preoperatively by anesthesiologists, the feasibility of electrophysiologist-performed PECs blocks from within cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) pockets at the time of implantation has not been established. The objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of routine PECs blocks performed by the electrophysiologist from within the exposed device pocket at the time of CIED procedures., Methods: Patients undergoing CIED procedures underwent a PECs I block (15 cc of 1% lidocaine/0.25% bupivacaine) injected between the pectoralis major and minor muscles guided by ultrasound placed in the device pocket, or PECs II block, which included a second injection (15 cc) between pectoralis minor and serratus anterior muscles. Postoperatively, pain was assessed on a numeric scale (0-10) at 1, 2, 4, and 24 h, and 2 weeks after the procedure., Results: Among 20 patients (age 65 ± 16 years, 70% male, 55% with history of chronic pain), PECs I (75%) and PECs II (25%) blocks were performed. The procedures were de novo implantation (n = 17) or device revision (n = 3). The average pain score in the first 4 h was 0.4 ± 0.8 and 0.3 ± 0.6 at 24 h after the procedure. During the 24-h postoperative period, 4 patients received opioids. Two patients were discharged with opioids for pain unrelated to the procedure., Conclusions: Intraoperative PECs blocks can be feasibly performed from within an exposed pocket at the time of CIED procedures with minimal postoperative pain., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Prescription opioids are a major contributor to the ongoing epidemic of persistent opioid use (POU). The incidence of POU among opioid-naïve patients after cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures is unknown., Methods: This retrospective cohort study used data from a national administrative claims database from 2004 to 2018 of patients undergoing CIED procedures. Adult patients were included if they were opioid-naïve during the 180-day period before the procedure and did not undergo another procedure with anesthesia in the next 180 days. POU was defined by filling an additional opioid prescription >30 days after the CIED procedure., Results: Of the 143 400 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 15 316 (11%) filled an opioid prescription within 14 days of surgery. Among these patients, POU occurred in 1901 (12.4%) patients 30 to 180 days after surgery. The likelihood of developing POU was increased for patients who had a history of drug abuse (odds ratio, 1.52; P =0.005), preoperative muscle relaxant (odds ratio, 1.52; P <0.001) or benzodiazepine (odds ratio, 1.23; P =0.001) use, or opioid use in the previous 5 years (OR, 1.76; P <0.0001). POU did not differ after subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator or other CIED procedures (11.1 versus 12.4%; P =0.5). In a sensitivity analysis excluding high-risk patients who were discharged to a facility or who had a history of drug abuse or previous opioid, benzodiazepine, or muscle relaxant use, 8.9% of the remaining cohort had POU. Patients prescribed >135 mg of oral morphine equivalents had a significantly increased risk of POU., Conclusions: POU is common after CIED procedures, and 12% of patients continued to use opioids >30 days after surgery. Higher initially prescribed oral morphine equivalent doses were associated with developing POU.

Ventricular arrhythmias can present as asymptomatic premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) or non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), symptomatic presentation of the former arrhythmias, or sustained VT with minimal symptoms to full hemodynamic collapse. The most important and feared consequence of VT is sudden cardiac death (SCD). Independent of SCD risk, frequent ventricular arrhythmias can cause substantial symptoms. Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are the foundation of managing patients at high risk for SCD due to their ability to automatically identify and defibrillate malignant ventricular arrhythmias. Unfortunately, defibrillation is associated with significant physical and emotional adverse effects. Other treatment options include antiarrhythmic drugs, which have substantial toxicities and limited efficacy, and catheter ablation. The techniques and strategies for VT ablation have advanced considerably in recent years leading to a rapid expansion of indications and use. In this review, we discuss current state of the art therapies for ventricular arrhythmias and highlight some of the most promising areas of ongoing development., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)