Síndrome de reel como causa del mal funcionamiento del marcapasos: A propósito de un caso / Reel syndrome as cause of pacemaker malfunction: Apropos of a case

Implantation of cardiac electronic devices is an increasingly common technique and the possibility of device dysfunction caused by electrode displacement should be taken into account. We describe the case of an 88-year-old patient with syncopes several months after pacemaker implantation in which a pacemaker dysfunction was found. Chest X-ray confirmed lead displacement reeled around the generator. Reel syndrome is an entity that should be ruled out as a possible cause of pacemaker malfunction mainly in patients with risk factors for developing this syndrome.

La implantación de dispositivos cardíacos electrónicos es una técnica cada vez más habitual y debe tenerse en cuenta la posibilidad de disfunción del dispositivo debido al desplazamiento de los electrodos. Describimos el caso de una paciente de 88 años que comenzó con clínica de cuadros sincopales varios meses después de la implantación de un marcapasos, y en la que se demostró una disfunción del dispositivo. Mediante radiografía de tórax se confirmó el desplazamiento de los electrodos debido a un enrollamiento alrededor del generador. El síndrome de reel es una entidad que debe ser descartada como una de las posibles causas de mal funcionamiento de un marcapasos, principalmente en pacientes con factores de riesgo para presentar dicho síndrome.

Investigation of subdural electrode displacement in invasive epilepsy surgery workup using neuronavigation and intraoperative MRI.

OBJECTIVES: One of the main obstacles of electrode implantation in epilepsy surgery is the electrode shift between implantation and the day of explantation. We evaluated this possible electrode displacement using intraoperative MRI (iopMRI) data and CT/MRI reconstruction. METHODS: Thirteen patients (nine female, four male, median age 26 ± 9.4 years) suffering from drug-resistant epilepsy were examined. After implantation, the position of subdural electrodes was evaluated by 3.0 T-MRI and thin-slice CCT for 3D reconstruction. Localization of electrodes was performed with the volume-rendering technique. Post-implantation and pre-explantation 1.5 T-iopMRI scans were coregistered with the 3D reconstructions to determine the extent of electrode dislocation. RESULTS: Intraoperative MRI at the time of explantation revealed a relevant electrode shift in one patient (8%) of 10 mm. Median electrode displacement was 1.7 ± 2.6 mm with a coregistration error of 1.9 ± 0.7 mm. The median accuracy of the neuronavigation system was 2.2 ± 0.9 mm. Six of twelve patients undergoing resective surgery were seizure free (Engel class 1A, median follow-up 37.5 ± 11.8 months). CONCLUSION: Comparison of pre-explantation and post-implantation iopMRI scans with CT/MRI data using the volume-rendering technique resulted in an accurate placement of electrodes. In one patient with a considerable electrode dislocation, the surgical approach and extent was changed due to the detected electrode shift. ABBREVIATIONS: ECoG: electrocorticography; EZ: epileptogenic zone; iEEG: invasive EEG; iopMRI: intraoperative MRI; MEG: magnetoencephalography; PET: positron emission tomography; SPECT: single photon emission computed tomography; 3D: three-dimensional.

Dislocated Pacemaker Electrode Simulating Focal Epileptic State in a Patient with Subdural Hematoma-Case Report and Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Due to demographic changes, the number of patients with traumatic brain injury carrying a cardiac resynchronization therapy device is increasing. One of the common complications of subdural hematoma (SDH) is epilepsy, whereas one of the most frequent early complications after cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation is lead dislocation. The latter might then cause unintended skeletal muscle stimulation that might be misinterpreted in seizure-prone patients. CASE DESCRIPTION: An 86-year-old female patient with an initially conservatively treated SDH on the right side presented with a tonic muscle contraction in her left arm 2 weeks after the trauma not responding to antiepileptic therapy. A computed tomography scan revealed residual hematoma on the right side with regular, time-dependent resorption. The muscle contraction was misdiagnosed as a focal epileptic state leading to evacuation of the chronic SDH. Additionally, routine postoperative chest radiographs were performed. Postoperatively, the tonic muscle contraction in her arm persisted. Chest radiographs revealed a dislocation of the left ventricular electrode, which appeared retracted into the left subclavian vein, next to the plexus brachialis. After deactivating the electrode, the alleged focal state ceased. CONCLUSIONS: In case of refractory treatment of epilepsy, dislocation of pacemaker electrodes is a, most certainly, rare but possible differential diagnosis. Confirmation of electrode position and function is easily and quickly feasible and will help prevent futile seizure-directed therapy.