Managing periprocedural cardiac tamponade in an invasive laboratory setting

    Authors

    Keywords

    pericardial tamponade, electrophysiological procedures, pericardiocentesis

    DOI

    https://doi.org/10.15836/ccar2024.622

    Full Text

    Pericardial tamponade is the most common major complication during invasive electrophysiology (EP) procedures, particularly in atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation ablations. According to a multicenter analysis, the incidence of tamponade in atrial fibrillation ablation is 0.67%, while in atrial flutter ablation it is 0.27%, and the highest incidence is during ventricular tachycardia ablations, with an incidence of 2.2%. Tamponade requires urgent care, including pericardiocentesis, and can be fatal if not promptly recognized and treated. Mortality associated with ablations is 0.17%, with tamponade contributing to 9.7% of all deaths following these procedures. (1) The most common procedure in most centers for treating tamponade begins with fluoroscopy-guided pericardiocentesis, typically through an anterior subxiphoid approach. After puncture, a pigtail catheter is inserted for continuous drainage of pericardial fluid. Protamine is routinely administered in most centers either immediately after diagnosis or after complete aspiration of blood from the pericardium. Auto-transfusion of aspirated blood is also standard in more than 70% of centers, while the decision for surgical intervention is made if bleeding is not controlled within 60 to 80 minutes. (1) Nurses play a key role in recognizing early symptoms of tamponade, quickly activating emergency protocols, and assisting during pericardiocentesis. Their responsibilities include monitoring vital signs, administering protamine to neutralize heparin, and performing auto-transfusion of aspirated blood, thereby contributing to the stabilization of the patient. (2) Establishing an effective, agreed-upon emergency protocol for cases such as tamponade is crucial for reducing risk and improving treatment outcomes, especially in hospitals with limited resources or without constant availability of cardiac surgery. (1)

    Literature

    1. Eckardt L, Doldi F, Anwar O, Gessler N, Scherschel K, Kahle AK, et al. Major in-hospital complications after catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias: individual case analysis of 43 031 procedures. Europace. 2023 December 28;26(1):euad361. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad361
    2. Metzner A, Sultan A, Futyma P, Richter S, Perrotta L, Chun KRJ. Prevention and treatment of pericardial tamponade in the electrophysiology laboratory: a European Heart Rhythm Association survey. Europace. 2023 December 28;26(1):euad378. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad378
    Cardiologia Croatica
    Back to search

    Managing periprocedural cardiac tamponade in an invasive laboratory setting

    Extended Abstract
    Issue11-12
    Published
    Pages622
    PDF via DOIhttps://doi.org/10.15836/ccar2024.622
    pericardial tamponade
    electrophysiological procedures
    pericardiocentesis

    Authors

    Ivica Benko*ORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
    Mateja LovrićORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
    Marina BudetićORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
    Mirela AdamovićORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
    Nikolina SlamekORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
    Marina ŽanićORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
    Marija GrlićORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
    Ivan HorvatORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia
    Mario TomaševićORCIDDubrava University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia

    *Correspondence email: ibenko@kbd.hr

    Full Text

    Pericardial tamponade is the most common major complication during invasive electrophysiology (EP) procedures, particularly in atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation ablations. According to a multicenter analysis, the incidence of tamponade in atrial fibrillation ablation is 0.67%, while in atrial flutter ablation it is 0.27%, and the highest incidence is during ventricular tachycardia ablations, with an incidence of 2.2%. Tamponade requires urgent care, including pericardiocentesis, and can be fatal if not promptly recognized and treated. Mortality associated with ablations is 0.17%, with tamponade contributing to 9.7% of all deaths following these procedures. (1) The most common procedure in most centers for treating tamponade begins with fluoroscopy-guided pericardiocentesis, typically through an anterior subxiphoid approach. After puncture, a pigtail catheter is inserted for continuous drainage of pericardial fluid. Protamine is routinely administered in most centers either immediately after diagnosis or after complete aspiration of blood from the pericardium. Auto-transfusion of aspirated blood is also standard in more than 70% of centers, while the decision for surgical intervention is made if bleeding is not controlled within 60 to 80 minutes. (1) Nurses play a key role in recognizing early symptoms of tamponade, quickly activating emergency protocols, and assisting during pericardiocentesis. Their responsibilities include monitoring vital signs, administering protamine to neutralize heparin, and performing auto-transfusion of aspirated blood, thereby contributing to the stabilization of the patient. (2) Establishing an effective, agreed-upon emergency protocol for cases such as tamponade is crucial for reducing risk and improving treatment outcomes, especially in hospitals with limited resources or without constant availability of cardiac surgery. (1)

    Literature

    1. 1.
      Eckardt L, Doldi F, Anwar O, Gessler N, Scherschel K, Kahle AK, et al. Major in-hospital complications after catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias: individual case analysis of 43 031 procedures. Europace. 2023 December 28;26(1):euad361.DOI
    2. 2.
      Metzner A, Sultan A, Futyma P, Richter S, Perrotta L, Chun KRJ. Prevention and treatment of pericardial tamponade in the electrophysiology laboratory: a European Heart Rhythm Association survey. Europace. 2023 December 28;26(1):euad378.DOI