Efficacy and safety of percutaneous left stellate ganglion block in patients with refractory electrical storm: our five years experience

Abstract

Abstract Background Neuromodulation by percutaneous stellate ganglion block (PSGB) with local anaesthetic has proven its antiarrhythmic effect suitable for an emergency setting. Purpose To assess the efficacy and safety of PSGB performed with an anterior anatomical approach in patients with refractory electrical storm. Methods Patients with electrical storm were enrolled from November 2017 to December 2022. Left PSGB (PLSGB) was performed after failure of at least one intravenous antiarrhythmic drug. Its repetition or a continuous infusion of the local anaesthetic were considered in selected cases. Clinical data, characteristics of the block and complications were collected. The efficacy was evaluated by comparing the number of arrhythmias treated with ATP or DC-shocks by external or internal defibrillator in the hour before the block with that in the hour after the block. Per-patient efficacy was assessed by comparing the number of ATP/shocks in the 12 hours before the first procedure with that in the 12 hours after the last one. Results 37 patients were enrolled: 76% male, mean age 65 years; 11 with dilated cardiomyopathy, 18 with chronic ischemic heart disease, 11 with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 3 with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 1 with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy and 1 with drug intoxication. A total of 62 PLSGBs were performed: 19 for ventricular tachycardia (VT), 26 for ventricular fibrillation (VF) and 17 for both VT and VF episodes; 15 on intubated patients, 4 in extracorporeal circulation, 14 in refractory cardiac arrest, 7 in cardiogenic/septic shock, 28 on patients on single antiplatelet therapy, 11 on dual antiplatelet therapy, 33 on anticoagulant therapy. PLSGBs were performed during intravenous infusion of antiarrhythmics (amiodarone in 30, lidocaine in 37 procedures). The local anaesthetic used was lidocaine in 27/62 PLSGB, bupivacaine in 6/62 and both in 29/62. The per-procedure analysis showed a significant reduction of the number of ATP/shocks in the hour after PLSGB compared with the hour before [0 (0-0) vs 5 (1-8) p<0.001]. Similarly, in the per-patient analysis, the number of ATP/shocks significantly decreased in the 12 hours after the PLSGB compared with that in the 12 hours before [0 (0-1.3) vs 7 (4.8-12.5) p<0.001]. No complications occurred. Conclusions This case series reports our five years experience in performing PLSGB for antiarrhythmic purpose and it confirms its efficacy and safety in the treatment of refractory electrical storm. In particular, the anatomical approach requires few tools and can be easily performed at the bedside.