Kaginele, Pranita

AbstractBackgroundThe subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (S‐ICD) has a larger generator and its implantation involves more dissection and tunneling compared to traditional transvenous defibrillator system. Liposomal bupivacaine, an extended‐release bupivacaine with 72 h of duration has been used for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing S‐ICD implantation. Our aim was to compare postoperative pain and opioid prescription patterns among patients undergoing S‐ICD implantation who received intraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine and those who did not.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent subcutaneous ICD implantation from January 1, 2013 to March 30, 2018 at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Patients were categorized into those who received liposomal bupivacaine and those who did not. Data on inpatient pain score, outpatient opioid prescription rates at discharge, and doses based on oral morphine equivalents (OME) were collected.ResultsA total of 104 patients underwent S‐ICD implantation. Intraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine was used in 69% of patients. Patients who received intraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine had similar mean inpatient pain scores (2.9 vs. 2.9, p = .786). There was also no difference in the rate of inpatient opioid administration (79.2% vs. 87.5%, p = .4139), outpatient opioid prescription (23.6% vs. 12.5%, p = .29), or mean OME (41.7‐mg vs. 16.6‐mg, p = .188) when comparing patients those who received intraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine and those who did not.ConclusionIntraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine administration was not associated with any significant impact on postoperative pain scores, inpatient opioid administration, and outpatient opioid prescription rates or OME amounts at discharge.

Background: Right ventricular systolic dysfunction (RVD) often coexists with various cardiopulmonary diseases. However, the association between RVD and risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) has not been well studied. This study examined the risk of SCD associated with RVD in patients with heterogeneous underlying cardiac diseases. Methods: The Mayo Clinic cardiac care unit database included 5463 consecutive patients with complete echocardiographic evaluation to assess right ventricular systolic function and RVD severity. Prospective surveillance follow-up was obtained for all patients. SCD was adjudicated when a malignant ventricular arrhythmia was documented as the primary rhythm leading to death. RESULTS: The prevalence of mild RVD and moderate-severe RVD was 14.9% and 17.1%, respectively. Patients with RVD were more likely to have a history of congestive heart failure, cardiac arrest, pulmonary disease, and lower baseline left ventricular ejection fraction compared with those with normal right ventricular systolic function. During a median follow-up of 14 months, the incidence of SCD was highest in patients with moderate-severe RVD (7.4% versus 4.4% in mild RVD versus 1.6% in normal right ventricular function; P <0.001). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, mild RVD (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.57; P =0.046) and moderate-severe RVD (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.91; P =0.006) were independently associated with an increased risk of SCD. Moderate-severe RVD remained an independent predictor of SCD for patients with left ventricular ejection fraction >35% without or with preexisting implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.12; P =0.003 and adjusted hazard ratio, 5.04; P <0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Presence of RVD in patients with a history of preexisting cardiac disease is an independent predictor of SCD irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction.