Literature DB >> 19250109

Contributions of advanced techniques to the success and safety of transvenous leads extraction.

Eloi Marijon1, Serge Boveda, Maxime De Guillebon, Sophie Jacob, Olivier Vahdat, Laurent Barandon, Nicolas Combes, Laurent Sidobre, Jean-Paul Albenque, Jacques Clémenty, Pierre Bordachar.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We measured the proportion of intravascular leads, which can be extracted by simple traction versus with newer techniques, and examined the overall safety and success rate of lead extractions.
METHODS: Between January 2005 and December 2007, 311 consecutive patients (mean age = 70 +/- 14 years, 79% men) underwent extractions of 250 atrial, 318 ventricular, and 22 coronary sinus leads, in the surgical facilities of two experienced medical centers, under general anesthesia, at a mean of 7.2 +/- 5.1 years (range 0.1-27.0) after lead implantation. Infection was the indication for extraction in 67.5% of cases. Complementary techniques were used when simple extraction with a locking stylet was unsuccessful.
RESULTS: Simple traction, with or without a locking stylet, allowed the complete removal in 27.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.1-31.9) of patients. A mechanical sheath, laser sheath, and/or lasso catheter were used in the remaining patients. The overall extraction success rate was 89.7% (95% CI 86.3-93.1). There was one procedure-related death (0.3%; 95% CI 0.0-1.0). Among five other deaths occurring within 10 days after the procedure, four were due to septic shock. Duration of lead implantation was the strongest independent predictor of major adverse events (P = 0.002) and incomplete lead extraction (P = 0.005).
CONCLUSION: In contrast with simple traction, advanced techniques allowed the complete extraction of nearly 90% of leads. In experienced hands and with surgical back-up, these techniques were safe. Patients presenting with infected implanted cardiac devices suffered a high rate of major adverse despite complete extraction of the lead(s).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19250109     DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2008.02225.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol        ISSN: 0147-8389            Impact factor:   1.976


  6 in total

1.  Outcomes and predictors of difficulty with coronary sinus lead removal.

Authors:  Seth Sheldon; Paul A Friedman; David L Hayes; Michael J Osborn; Yong-Mei Cha; Robert F Rea; Samuel J Asirvatham
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 1.900

2.  [Laser sheath extraction of an infected pacemaker lead].

Authors:  Hamdi ElFarra; Rainer Moosdorf; Thomas Kratz; Wolfram Grimm
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2013-06-14

Review 3.  Lead extraction using a laser system: Techniques, efficacy, and limitations.

Authors:  Hideo Okamura
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2015-08-18

4.  Laser Lead Extraction During Venoarterial ECMO support.

Authors:  Yalin Yildirim; Johannes Petersen; Tobias Tönnis; Christian Detter; Hermann Reichenspurner; Simon Pecha
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2022-05-23

5.  Forces applied during transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead removal.

Authors:  Carsten Lennerz; Herribert Pavaci; Christian Grebmer; Gesa von Olshausen; Verena Semmler; Alessandra Buiatti; Tilko Reents; Sonia Ammar; Isabel Deisenhofer; Christof Kolb
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  A non-conventional approach to 10-year-delayed extraction of pacemaker leads associated with recurrent infective complications.

Authors:  Nicolae Dan Tesloianu; Andreea Mihaela Ignat; Dana Corduneanu; Antoniu Octavian Petris; Ionut Tudorancea
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.596

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.