Journal of Rare Cardiovascular Diseases

INTRODUCTION: Superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome is a rare clinical disorder associated with obstructing venous outflow through the SVC. Although the most common cause is mediastinal tumors, the growing number of implantable cardiac devices procedures has resulted in more patients with SVC syndrome of non‐malignant etiology. DISCUSSION: It has been shown repeatedly that the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) improves the quality of life of patients with symptomatic arrhythmias and
reduces the mortality of patients at risk of sudden cardiac death, but the risk of complications also exists. CONCLUSION: The most common finding in patients with cardiac devices is asymptomatic venous thrombosis, but serious complications, including SVC obstruction should always be considered. The rapid identification of clinical symptoms and the implementation of appropriate measures are a key to preventing the morbidity and mortality of the patients. JRCD 2018; 4 (1): 5-8.

rare disease; permanent pacemaker; implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator; cardiac resynchronization therapy; multimodality imaging

Wilson LD, Detterbeck FC, Yahalom J. Superior vena cava syndrome with malignant causes. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1862–1869.

Rice TW, Rodriguez RM, Light RW. The superior vena cava syndrome: Clinical characteristics and evolving etiology. Medicine 2006; 85:37-42.

Wertheimer M, Hughes RK, Hilmon Castle C. Superior vena cava syndrome. Complication of permanent transvenous endocardial cardiac pacing. JAMA 1973; 224: 1172-3.

Barakat K, Robinson NM, Spurrell RA. Transvenous pacing lead-induced thrombosis: a series of cases with a review of the literature. Cardiology 2000; 93:142–148.

Lin CT, Kuo CT, Lin KH, Hsu TS. Superior vena cava syndrome as a complication of transvenous permanent pacemaker implantation. Jpn Heart J 1999; 40:477– 480.

Mond HG, Proclemer A. The 11th world survey of cardiac pacing and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: calendar year 2009–a World Society of Arrhythmia’s project. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011;34(8):1013-27.

Nowak B, Misselwitz B. Expert committee ‘Pacemaker’, Institute of Quality Assurance Hessen, et al. Do gender differences exist in pacemaker implantation? – results of an obligatory external quality control program. Europace. 2010;12(2):210–215.

Lee DS, Krahn AD, Healey JS, et al. Evaluation of early complications related to de novo cardioverter defibrillator implantation insights from the Ontario ICD database. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(8):774–782.

Van Rooden CJ, Molhoek SG, Rosendal FR, et al. Incidence and risk factors of early

venous thrombosis associated with permanent pacemaker leads. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2004; 15:1258-62.

Oginosawa Y, Abe H, Nakashima Y. The incidence and risk factors for venous

obstruction after implantation of transvenous pacing leads. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2002; 25:1605–1611.

Rozmus G, Daubert JP, Huang DT, et al. Venous thrombosis and stenosis after implantation of pacemakers and defibrillators. J Interv Card Electgrophysiol 2005, 13:9-19.

De Costa SS, Scalabrini NA, Costa R, et al. Incidence and risk factors of upper extremity deep vein lesions after permanent transvenous pacemaker implant. A 6-month follow-up prospective study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2002; 25:1301–6.

Chee CE, Bjarnason H, Prasad A. Superior vena cava syndrome: an increasingly frequent complication of cardiac procedures. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2007; 4:226-230.