• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.50 no.2
• /
• pp.156-159
• /
• 2023

Breast implants whether used for cosmetic or reconstructive purposes can be placed in pockets either above or below the pectoralis major muscle, depending on clinical circumstances such as subcutaneous tissue volume, history of radiation, and patient preference. Likewise, cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) can be placed above or below the pectoralis major muscle. When a patient has both devices, knowledge of the pocket location is important for procedural planning and for durability of device placement and performance. Here, we report a patient who previously failed subcutaneous CIED placement due to incision manipulation with prior threatened device exposure requiring plane change to subpectoral pocket. Her course was complicated by submuscular migration of the CIED into her breast implant periprosthetic pocket. With subcutaneous plane change being inadvisable due to patient noncompliance, soft tissue support of subpectoral CIED placement with an acellular biologic matrix (ABM) was performed. Similar to soft tissue support used for breast implants, submuscular CIED neo-pocket creation with ABM was performed with durable CIED device positioning confirmed at 9 months postprocedure.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.44 no.1
• /
• pp.42-47
• /
• 2017

Background Skin erosion is a dire complication of implantable cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators. Classical treatments involve removal of the entire generator and lead systems, however, these may result in fatal complications. In this study, we present our experience with a simplified salvage technique for exposed implantable cardiac electronic devices (ICEDs) without removing the implanted device, in an attempt to reduce the risks and complication rates associated with this condition. Methods The records of 10 patients who experienced direct ICED exposure between January 2012 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The following surgical procedure was performed in all patients: removal of skin erosion and capsule, creation of a new pocket at least 1.0-1.5 cm inferior to its original position, migration of the ICED to the new pocket, and insertion of closed-suction drainage. Patients with gross local sepsis or septicemia were excluded from this study. Results Seven patients had cardiac pacemakers and the other 3 had implantable cardiac defibrillators. The time from primary ICED placement to exposure ranged from 0.3 to 151 months (mean, 29 months. Postoperative follow-up in this series ranged from 8 to 31 months (mean follow-up, 22 months). Among the 10 patients, none presented with any signs of overt infection or cutaneous lesions, except 1 patient with hematoma on postoperative day 5. The hematoma was successfully treated by surgical removal and repositioning of the closed-suction drainage. Conclusions Based on our experience, salvage of exposed ICEDs is possible without removing the device in selected patients.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.150-154
• /
• 2019

The objective of this study is to monitor the radiation doses delivered to a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) by comparing the absorbed doses calculated by a commercial treatment planning system (TPS) to those measured by an in vivo dosimeter. Accurate monitoring of the radiation absorbed by a CIED during radiotherapy is necessary to prevent damage to the device. We conducted this study on three patients, who had the CIED inserted and were to be treated with radiotherapy. Treatment plans were generated using the Eclipse system, with a progressive resolution photon optimizer algorithm and the Acuros XB dose calculation algorithm. Measurements were performed on the patients using optically stimulated luminescence detectors placed on the skin, near the CIED. The results showed that the calculated doses from the TPS were up to 5 times lower than the measured doses. Therefore, it is recommended that in vivo dosimetry be conducted during radiotherapy for CIED patients to prevent damage to the CIED.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.44 no.1
• /
• pp.34-41
• /
• 2017

Background The current indications of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) have expanded to include young patients with serious cardiac risk factors, but CIED placement has the disadvantage of involving unsightly scarring and bulging of the chest wall. A collaborative team of cardiologists and plastic surgeons developed a technique for the subpectoral placement of CIEDs in young female patients via a transaxillary approach. Methods From July 2012 to December 2015, subpectoral CIED placement via an axillary incision was performed in 10 young female patients, with a mean age of 25.9 years and mean body mass index of $20.1kg/m^2$. In the supine position, with the patient's shoulder abducted, an approximately 5-cm linear incision was made along one of the deepest axillary creases. The submuscular plane was identified at the lateral border of the pectoralis major, and the dissection continued over the clavipectoral fascia until the subpectoral pocket could securely receive a pulse generator. Slight upward dissection also exposed an entrance to the subclavian vein, allowing the cardiology team to gain access to the vein. One patient with dilated cardiomyopathy underwent augmentation mammoplasty and CIED insertion simultaneously. Results One case of late-onset device infection occurred. All patients were highly satisfied with the results and reported that they would recommend the procedure to others. Conclusions With superior aesthetic outcomes compared to conventional methods, the subpectoral placement of CIEDs via a transaxillary approach is an effective, single-incision method to hide operative scarring and minimize bulging of the device, and is particularly beneficial for young female or lean patients.

• Journal of Korean Biological Nursing Science
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.298-307
• /
• 2021

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the risk factors for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-related infections within the first post-procedural year after CIED insertion. Methods: This study included 509 adult patients undergoing CIED implantation procedures between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015. The data were analyzed by t-test, chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression analysis using SPSS/WIN 23.0. Results: Fifteen infections and 494 non-infections were examined. The CIED-related infection rate was 2.9%; patients with 14 pocket infections and one bacteremia were included in the CIED-related infection. The risk factors of CIED-related infections were the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of ≤ 45 mL/min/1.73 m² (Odds ratio [OR]= 4.03, 95% confidence interval [CI],1.15-14.10) and taking a new oral anticoagulant (NOAC) (OR = 4.50, 95% CI 1.09-18.55). Conclusion: These results identified the CIED infection rate and risk factors of CIED-related infection. It is necessary to consider these risk factors before the CIED implantation procedure and to establish the relevant nursing interventions.

• Korean Journal of Radiology
• /
• v.22 no.11
• /
• pp.1918-1928
• /
• 2021

Objective: With the recent development of various MRI-conditional cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), the accurate identification and characterization of CIEDs have become critical when performing MRI in patients with CIEDs. We aimed to develop and evaluate a deep learning-based algorithm (DLA) that performs the detection and characterization of parameters, including MRI safety, of CIEDs on chest radiograph (CR) in a single step and compare its performance with other related algorithms that were recently developed. Materials and Methods: We developed a DLA (X-ray CIED identification [XCID]) using 9912 CRs of 958 patients with 968 CIEDs comprising 26 model groups from 4 manufacturers obtained between 2014 and 2019 from one hospital. The performance of XCID was tested with an external dataset consisting of 2122 CRs obtained from a different hospital and compared with the performance of two other related algorithms recently reported, including PacemakerID (PID) and Pacemaker identification with neural networks (PPMnn). Results: The overall accuracies of XCID for the manufacturer classification, model group identification, and MRI safety characterization using the internal test dataset were 99.7% (992/995), 97.2% (967/995), and 98.9% (984/995), respectively. These were 95.8% (2033/2122), 85.4% (1813/2122), and 92.2% (1956/2122), respectively, with the external test dataset. In the comparative study, the accuracy for the manufacturer classification was 95.0% (152/160) for XCID and 91.3% for PPMnn (146/160), which was significantly higher than that for PID (80.0%,128/160; p < 0.001 for both). XCID demonstrated a higher accuracy (88.1%; 141/160) than PPMnn (80.0%; 128/160) in identifying model groups (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The remarkable and consistent performance of XCID suggests its applicability for detection, manufacturer and model identification, as well as MRI safety characterization of CIED on CRs. Further studies are warranted to guarantee the safe use of XCID in clinical practice.