BACKGROUND: According to published evidence, treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) associated with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) should include complete removal of the system. Several publications have shown that transvenous removal is an effective and safe nonthoracotomy approach in patients with large vegetations, but experiences with vegetations larger than 20 mm have rarely been reported. HYPOTHESIS: Our aim was to describe our experience in percutaneous removal of CIEDs in patients with IE with large vegetations. METHODS: The data were collected retrospectively and analyzed prospectively. We evaluated in-hospital morbidity and mortality related to percutaneous removal of vegetations ≥20 mm. This included 8 cases with a follow-up period of 20 months. We removed 100% of leads in the study population. RESULTS: Two patients experienced minor complications. No patient experienced subclavian vein laceration, hemothorax and lead fracture, or severe tricuspid regurgitation. After the removal procedure, 2 patients had symptoms compatible with pulmonary embolism. Both in-hospital mortality and mortality at follow-up were zero. CONCLUSIONS: Transvenous extraction of pacing leads with larger vegetations is a feasible technique. There was a tendency toward symptomatic pulmonary embolism in patients with vegetations larger than 20 mm; however, morbidity and mortality were not influenced. We agree with the consensus that this procedure is highly useful and that the selection of the removal techniques will depend not only on the size of vegetation but also on prior cardiopulmonary conditions, concomitant cardiac surgery, atrial septal defect with risk of paradoxical embolism, center experience, and the possibility of complete removal of the device.
BACKGROUND: According to published evidence, treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) associated with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) should include complete removal of the system. Several publications have shown that transvenous removal is an effective and safe nonthoracotomy approach in patients with large vegetations, but experiences with vegetations larger than 20 mm have rarely been reported. HYPOTHESIS: Our aim was to describe our experience in percutaneous removal of CIEDs in patients with IE with large vegetations. METHODS: The data were collected retrospectively and analyzed prospectively. We evaluated in-hospital morbidity and mortality related to percutaneous removal of vegetations ≥20 mm. This included 8 cases with a follow-up period of 20 months. We removed 100% of leads in the study population. RESULTS: Two patients experienced minor complications. No patient experienced subclavian vein laceration, hemothorax and lead fracture, or severe tricuspid regurgitation. After the removal procedure, 2 patients had symptoms compatible with pulmonary embolism. Both in-hospital mortality and mortality at follow-up were zero. CONCLUSIONS: Transvenous extraction of pacing leads with larger vegetations is a feasible technique. There was a tendency toward symptomatic pulmonary embolism in patients with vegetations larger than 20 mm; however, morbidity and mortality were not influenced. We agree with the consensus that this procedure is highly useful and that the selection of the removal techniques will depend not only on the size of vegetation but also on prior cardiopulmonary conditions, concomitant cardiac surgery, atrial septal defect with risk of paradoxical embolism, center experience, and the possibility of complete removal of the device.