ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2021
Electrical storm after correction of an uncomplicated congenital atrial septal defect in an adult: a case report.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a paucity of published literature describing electrical storm after the correction of uncomplicated atrial septal defect (ASD) in an adult. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a 49-year-old woman with a congenital ASD combined with mild tricuspid regurgitation who denied any history of arrhythmia or other medical history. She suffered from electrical storm (≥ 3 episodes of ventricular tachycardias or ventricular fibrillations) in the early stage after ASD repair with combined tricuspid valvuloplasty. During electrical storm, her electrolytes were within normal ranges and no ischemic electrocardiographic changes were detected, which suggested that retained air embolism or acute coronary thrombosis were unlikely. Additionally, echocardiographic findings and her central venous pressure (5-8 mmHg during the interval between attacks) failed to support the diagnosis of pericardial tamponade. After a thorough discussion, the surgeons conducted an emergent re-exploration and repeated closure of the ASD with combined DeVega's annuloplasty. Eventually, the patient recovered uneventfully, without reoccurring arrhythmias during follow-up. Although we fail to determine the definite cause, we speculate that the causes probably are iatrogenic injury of the conduction system due to a rare anatomic variation, poor intraoperative protection, latent coronary distortion during tricuspid valvuloplasty, or idiopathic or secondary abnormalities of the conduction system.
conclusionsFor most surgeons, performing re-exploration without a known etiology is a difficult decision to make. This case illustrates that re-exploration could be an option when electrical storm occurs in the early stage postoperatively. Nevertheless, surgeons should assess the benefit-risk ratio when taking this unconventional measure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.