
AJUNTAMENT D'ALCOI
Website

Generalitat Valenciana
Website

Ayuntamiento de Valencia
Website

Cicloplast
Website

Ayuntamiento de Onil
Website

Anarpla
Website

Ayuntamiento de Mislata
Website

nlWA, North London Waste Authority
Website

Ayuntamiento de Salinas
Website

Zicla
Website

Fondazione Ecosistemi
Website

PEFC
Website

ALQUIENVAS
Website

DIPUTACI� DE VAL�NCIA
Website

AYUNTAMIENTO DE REQUENA
Website

UNIVERSIDAD DE ZARAGOZA
Website

OBSERVATORIO CONTRATACIÓN PÚBLICA
Website

AYUNTAMIENTO DE PAIPORTA
Website

AYUNTAMIENTO DE CUENCA
Website

BERL� S.A.
Website

CM PLASTIK
Website

TRANSFORMADORES INDUSTRIALES ECOL�GICOS

INDUSTRIAS AGAPITO
Website

RUBI KANGURO
Website
If you want to support our LIFE project as a STAKEHOLDER, please contact with us: life-future-project@aimplas.es
In this section, you can access to the latest technical information related to the FUTURE project topic.
Is transjugular insertion of a temporary pacemaker a safe and effective approach?
Temporary pacemakers (TPMs) are usually inserted in an emergency situation. However, there are few reports available regarding which route of access is best or what the most preferred approach is currently in tertiary hospitals. This study aimed to compare procedure times, complication rates, and indications for temporary pacing between the transjugular and transfemoral approaches to TPM placement. We analyzed consecutive patients who underwent TPM placement. Indications; procedure times; and rates of complications including localized infection, any bleeding, and pacing wire repositioning rates were analyzed. A total of 732 patients (361 treated via the transjugular approach and 371 treated via the transfemoral approach) were included. Complete atrioventricular block was the most common cause of TPM placement in both groups, but sick sinus syndrome was especially common in the transjugular approach group. Separately, procedure time was significantly shorter in the transjugular approach group (9.0 ? 8.0 minutes vs. 11.9 ? 9.7 minutes; P < 0.001). Overall complication rates were not significantly different between the two groups, and longer duration of temporary pacing was a risk factor for repositioning. The risk of reposition was significantly increased when the temporary pacing was continued more than 5 days and 3 days in the transjugular approach group and the transfemoral approach group, respectively. The transjugular approach should be considered if the TPM is required for more than 3 days.

» Author: Kwang Jin Chun, Hye Bin Gwag, Jin Kyung Hwang, Seung-Jung Park, Young Keun On, June Soo Kim, Kyoung-Min Park
» Reference: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233129
» Publication Date: 12/05/2020
C/ Gustave Eiffel, 4
(València Parc Tecnològic) - 46980
PATERNA (Valencia) - SPAIN
(+34) 96 136 60 40
Project Management department - Sustainability and Industrial Recovery
life-future-project@aimplas.es
