Perioperative Management of a Spinal Cord Stimulator During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Case Report.
- 1Department of Anaesthesia, Austin Health, Heidelberg, AUS.
- 2Department of Cardiology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, AUS.
- 3Department of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, AUS.
Abstract
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established treatment for chronic neuropathic pain, and patients with an implanted stimulator are presenting with increasing frequency for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We describe an 88-year-old man with a high-frequency (10 kHz) spinal cord stimulator for chronic back pain who underwent transfemoral TAVI under sedation for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. After consultation with the implanting pain service, the stimulator was switched off with the patient's own remote control, which was kept in the procedure room; rapid ventricular pacing was delivered through a bipolar right ventricular lead so that the pacing current was confined to the myocardium and remote from the pulse generator; and external defibrillator pads were positioned away from the generator and the course of the leads. The procedure was uneventful. The patient tolerated the interruption of therapy without clinically significant pain; a new left bundle branch block after valve deployment was identified on an artefact-free trace, stimulation was resumed after the procedure with analgesia equivalent to baseline, and subsequent interrogation confirmed normal device function. The case illustrates the application of a precautionary strategy informed by manufacturer labelling and analogous evidence; because the stimulator was off throughout, it does not establish that any individual measure was necessary. We examine how the hazards of the cardiac catheterisation laboratory differ from those of the operating theatre and propose a structured six-step approach to the management of a spinal cord stimulator during TAVI.
Related
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Complex Anatomy: An Anatomy-Driven Framework for Bicuspid Stenosis, Pure Aortic Regurgitation, and the Small Annulus in the Era of Lifetime Management
- Coronary artery disease management in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- Non-Cardiac Surgery After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: Perioperative Management and Outcomes from a Single Center
- Dermabond versus suture fixation for spinal cord stimulator trial lead anchoring: a randomized within-patient controlled trial
- Modified balloon-assisted shoehorn technique for transcatheter aortic valve implantation in functionally horizontal anatomy: a case report
BibTeX
@article{zheng2026perioperative,
title = {{Perioperative Management of a Spinal Cord Stimulator During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Case Report.}},
author = {Jonathan Zheng and Julian Yeoh and Matias Yudi and Anoop N Koshy and Laurence Weinberg},
journal = {Cureus},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.7759/cureus.118692},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42953827},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Perioperative Management of a Spinal Cord Stimulator During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Case Report.
AU - Jonathan Zheng
AU - Julian Yeoh
AU - Matias Yudi
AU - Anoop N Koshy
AU - Laurence Weinberg
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/27
JO - Cureus
DO - 10.7759/cureus.118692
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42953827
AB - Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established treatment for chronic neuropathic pain, and patients with an implanted stimulator are presenting with increasing frequency for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We describe an 88-year-old man with a high-frequency (10 kHz) spinal cord stimulator for chronic back pain who underwent transfemoral TAVI under sedation for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. After consultation with the implanting pain service, the stimulator was switched off with the patient's own remote control, which was kept in the procedure room; rapid ventricular pacing was delivered through a bipolar right ventricular lead so that the pacing current was confined to the myocardium and remote from the pulse generator; and external defibrillator pads were positioned away from the generator and the course of the leads. The procedure was uneventful. The patient tolerated the interruption of therapy without clinically significant pain; a new left bundle branch block after valve deployment was identified on an artefact-free trace, stimulation was resumed after the procedure with analgesia equivalent to baseline, and subsequent interrogation confirmed normal device function. The case illustrates the application of a precautionary strategy informed by manufacturer labelling and analogous evidence; because the stimulator was off throughout, it does not establish that any individual measure was necessary. We examine how the hazards of the cardiac catheterisation laboratory differ from those of the operating theatre and propose a structured six-step approach to the management of a spinal cord stimulator during TAVI.
SN - 2168-8184
ER -