BACKGROUND: Increasing application of cardiac resynchronization therapy is accompanied by an increase in patients requiring removal of coronary sinus (CS) leads. The aim of this study was to determine outcomes of closed chest CS lead extraction using intravascular dissection devices. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2011, 41 patients (80.5% men; aged 64.2±13.8 years) underwent transvenous CS lead extraction procedures. Reasons for lead extraction were infection in 9, CS lead dislodgement in 15, lead malfunction, including manufacturer-initiated product recall in 6, phrenic nerve stimulation in 5, combinations of causes in 5, and elective extraction concomitant with generator replacement for battery depletion in 1. RESULTS: In addition to 24 isolated CS lead extractions, we performed 17 multiple lead extractions (2 to 4 leads) after a mean of 30.6±32.5 months. The time elapsed from implantation was 4.6±9.1 months for isolated CS and 42.6±32.4 months for multiple lead extractions. Extraction by direct manual traction was feasible in 13 patients by locking stylets in 6. Escalation to mechanical sheaths was required in 17 patients and to electrosurgical sheaths in 5. More aggressive methods were associated with longer implantation times and positive infection status. No deaths or major periprocedural complications occurred. Six minor postprocedural complications, of which three were surgically related, occurred in 5 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Closed chest CS lead extraction can be safely performed with excellent results. We recommend an escalating approach from isolated manual traction over locking stylets to mechanical sheaths and, eventually, electrosurgical dissection devices. The application in mainly high-risk patients demands an interdisciplinary approach to enhance safety and limit morbidity and death.
BACKGROUND: Increasing application of cardiac resynchronization therapy is accompanied by an increase in patients requiring removal of coronary sinus (CS) leads. The aim of this study was to determine outcomes of closed chest CS lead extraction using intravascular dissection devices. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2011, 41 patients (80.5% men; aged 64.2±13.8 years) underwent transvenous CS lead extraction procedures. Reasons for lead extraction were infection in 9, CS lead dislodgement in 15, lead malfunction, including manufacturer-initiated product recall in 6, phrenic nerve stimulation in 5, combinations of causes in 5, and elective extraction concomitant with generator replacement for battery depletion in 1. RESULTS: In addition to 24 isolated CS lead extractions, we performed 17 multiple lead extractions (2 to 4 leads) after a mean of 30.6±32.5 months. The time elapsed from implantation was 4.6±9.1 months for isolated CS and 42.6±32.4 months for multiple lead extractions. Extraction by direct manual traction was feasible in 13 patients by locking stylets in 6. Escalation to mechanical sheaths was required in 17 patients and to electrosurgical sheaths in 5. More aggressive methods were associated with longer implantation times and positive infection status. No deaths or major periprocedural complications occurred. Six minor postprocedural complications, of which three were surgically related, occurred in 5 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Closed chest CS lead extraction can be safely performed with excellent results. We recommend an escalating approach from isolated manual traction over locking stylets to mechanical sheaths and, eventually, electrosurgical dissection devices. The application in mainly high-risk patients demands an interdisciplinary approach to enhance safety and limit morbidity and death.
Authors: Andrzej W Kutarski; Wojciech Jacheć; Łukasz Tułecki; Konrad Tomków; Paweł Stefańczyk; Wojciech Borzęcki; Dorota Nowosielecka; Marek Czajkowski; Maciej Polewczyk; Anna Polewczyk Journal: Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 1.426