T Schroeter1, M A Borger, F W Mohr. 1. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Herzzentrum Leipzig, University of Leipzig, Strümpellstr. 39, 04289, Leipzig, Germany. Thomas-Schroeter@gmx.de
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Intentional or unintentional placement of a pacemaker lead into the left ventricle is an uncommon clinical entity that is associated with a high risk for systemic embolization and enormous difficulties in case of explantation. Unintentional implantation through a patent foramen ovale via the mitral valve is the usual pathway for this malposition. METHODS: We report a case where a pacemaker lead was placed intentionally into the left ventricle via a patent foramen ovale for biventricular pacing for resynchronization therapy. Later, the patient developed life-threatening pacemaker lead-associated endocarditis with sepsis. Emergency open heart surgery for lead removal was necessary in the form of a reoperation after bypass graft surgery a number of years earlier. CONCLUSION: Although it is technically feasible to implant the pacemaker lead into the left ventricle via a patent foramen ovale, we consider this option to be obsolete for use with a biventricular pacemaker, due to the multitude of risks, which can, in part, be life-threatening for the patient.
INTRODUCTION: Intentional or unintentional placement of a pacemaker lead into the left ventricle is an uncommon clinical entity that is associated with a high risk for systemic embolization and enormous difficulties in case of explantation. Unintentional implantation through a patent foramen ovale via the mitral valve is the usual pathway for this malposition. METHODS: We report a case where a pacemaker lead was placed intentionally into the left ventricle via a patent foramen ovale for biventricular pacing for resynchronization therapy. Later, the patient developed life-threatening pacemaker lead-associated endocarditis with sepsis. Emergency open heart surgery for lead removal was necessary in the form of a reoperation after bypass graft surgery a number of years earlier. CONCLUSION: Although it is technically feasible to implant the pacemaker lead into the left ventricle via a patent foramen ovale, we consider this option to be obsolete for use with a biventricular pacemaker, due to the multitude of risks, which can, in part, be life-threatening for the patient.
Authors: William T Abraham; Westby G Fisher; Andrew L Smith; David B Delurgio; Angel R Leon; Evan Loh; Dusan Z Kocovic; Milton Packer; Alfredo L Clavell; David L Hayes; Myrvin Ellestad; Robin J Trupp; Jackie Underwood; Faith Pickering; Cindy Truex; Peggy McAtee; John Messenger Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-06-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael R Bristow; Leslie A Saxon; John Boehmer; Steven Krueger; David A Kass; Teresa De Marco; Peter Carson; Lorenzo DiCarlo; David DeMets; Bill G White; Dale W DeVries; Arthur M Feldman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: S Cazeau; C Leclercq; T Lavergne; S Walker; C Varma; C Linde; S Garrigue; L Kappenberger; G A Haywood; M Santini; C Bailleul; J C Daubert Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-03-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thelma C Konings; Dave R Koolbergen; Berto J Bouma; Maarten Groenink; Barbara J Mulder Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 5.251