Endoscopic Electrosurgery in Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.
- Author:
Myong Ki BAEG
1
;
Sang Woo KIM
;
Sun Hye KO
;
Yoon Bum LEE
;
Seawon HWANG
;
Bong Woo LEE
;
Hye Jin CHOI
;
Jae Myung PARK
;
In Seok LEE
;
Yong Seog OH
;
Myung Gyu CHOI
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Endoscopic electrosurgery; Electromagnetic interference; Defibrillators, implantable; Permanent pacemaker
- MeSH: Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Colon; Defibrillators, Implantable; Electrocardiography; Electrocardiography, Ambulatory; Electrosurgery*; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Magnets; Medical Records; Outpatients; Retrospective Studies; SNARE Proteins; Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic; Tachycardia
- From:Clinical Endoscopy 2016;49(2):176-181
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: BACKGROUND/AIMS: Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) undergoing endoscopic electrosurgery (EE) are at a risk of electromagnetic interference (EMI). We aimed to analyze the effects of EE in CIED patients. METHODS: Patients with CIED who underwent EE procedures such as snare polypectomy, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) were retrospectively analyzed. Postprocedural symptoms as well as demographic and outpatient follow-up data were reviewed through medical records. Electrical data, including preprocedural and postprocedural arrhythmia records, were reviewed through pacemaker interrogation, 24-hour Holter monitoring, or electrocardiogram. RESULTS: Fifty-nine procedures in 49 patients were analyzed. Fifty procedures were performed in 43 patients with a pacemaker, and nine were performed in six patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. There were one gastric and 44 colon snare polypectomies, five gastric and one colon ESDs, and eight ERCPs with EST. Fifty-five cases of electrical follow-up were noted, with two postprocedural changes not caused by EE. Thirty-one pacemaker interrogations had procedure recordings, with two cases of asymptomatic tachycardia. All patients were asymptomatic with no adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reports no adverse events from EE in patients with CIED, suggesting that this procedure is safe. However, because of the possibility of EMI, recommendations on EE should be followed.
