Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41209971›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Radiofrequency Cautery: A Safe Option for Patients With Indwelling Devices.

Andrew M Alfred, Aaron M Kessler, Dena Danji, Arpan Kohli

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Andrew M AlfredAnesthesiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, USA.
Aaron M KesslerAnesthesiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, USA.
Dena DanjiAnesthesiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, USA.
Arpan KohliAnesthesiology, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increasing prevalence of non-cardiac implantable electrical devices (NCIEDs), including deep brain stimulators (DBS), spinal cord stimulators (SCS), and an increasing list of other devices, presents a significant challenge to conscientious perioperative care teams. The major anticipated operative complications of having a pre-existing indwelling device are twofold. For the first category, there is the profound threat of direct thermal injury to tissue surrounding the device in question, as well as the lateral thermal spread. Of course, when the surrounding tissue is neural and may involve deep brain structures or spinal cord structures, these concerns are all the more pressing. As for the second category of anticipated danger, there is the concern of destructive interaction between electrocautery and the device itself. Considering the total investment made for the patient to acquire an implantable device and follow-up for adjustment and tuning, as well as the potential for uncontrolled or unintentional delivery of electricity, this is a significant concern. Such interactions could conceivably lead to worsened control of pre-existing neurologic conditions or chronic pain, making a recovery to baseline unpredictable or even impossible without further post-operative intervention. We present the case of a 56-year-old male patient with diabetic neuropathy treated with SCS and Parkinson's disease treated with DBS undergoing triple-vessel coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Due to concerns of potential interaction between the cautery device and the NCIEDs, causing direct thermal injury as well as device malfunction, both indwelling devices were powered down pre-operatively. Furthermore, although bipolar electrocautery is a relatively safe and more widely known option for patients with NCIEDs, the caveat of poor hemostasis was presented by the surgical team. With this in mind, the decision was made to proceed with PlasmaBlade (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) monopolar radiofrequency cautery, which according to its manufacturer, is notably less likely to cause damage to NCIEDs. The patient tolerated cardiac surgery with no bleeding complications or unintended consequence to the implanted devices, nor was there any apparent or suspected thermal injury to the tissue surrounding the devices.

Indexed as

dbsdeep brain stimulators (dbs)lead impedancenon-cardiac implantable electrical devicesperioperative managementradiofrequency cauteryscsspinal cord stimulators (scs)

Identifiers

PMID41209971
PMCPMC12592742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.