Literature DB >> 24888641

Clinical, anatomical, and technical risk factors for postoperative pacemaker or defibrillator lead perforation with particular focus on myocardial thickness.

Marius Schwerg1, Martin Stockburger, Christoph Schulze, Hansjürgen Bondke, Wolfram C Poller, Alexander Lembcke, Christoph Melzer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Postoperative lead perforation is a life-threatening complication of cardiac pacing. Identification of precipitating factors for this serious complication may help to anticipate a specific risk profile and to minimize the incidence.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective tertiary referral center analysis to clarify clinical, anatomical, and technical characteristics related to pacemaker (PM) and cardioverter/defibrillator lead perforation. We examined the baseline characteristics and the symptoms. In a subgroup, we investigated the myocardial thickness on contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography.
RESULTS: We enrolled 26 patients. Female gender appears to put patients at slightly increased risk for lead perforation. In a majority active fixation leads were used. Symptoms occurred in 72%. Pericardial effusion and tamponade were present in 38% and 19%, respectively. Sensing was compromised in 65%. A high pacing threshold or exit block occurred in 92%. Myocardial thickness did not differ between patients with or without perforation. In 96%, the perforation was treated by transvenous withdrawal.
CONCLUSION: Chest pain, phrenic stimulation, bad sensing, or exit block early after PM implantation must prompt radiological and echocardiographic evaluation. A missing pericardial effusion particularly late after implantation does not rule out a perforation. Especially active fixating leads have a higher risk of perforation. With cardiac surgery in standby transvenous withdrawal is a safe way to treat lead perforation. ©2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cardioverter/defibrillator; lead perforation; pacemaker; risk factors

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24888641     DOI: 10.1111/pace.12431

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


  5 in total

1.  Left ventricular free wall perforation by a right ventricular pacemaker lead: a case report.

Authors:  Natsuko Satomi; Kenji Enta; Masato Otsuka; Yasuhiro Ishii; Ryota Asano; Shigeharu Sawa
Journal:  Eur Heart J Case Rep       Date:  2021-03-31

2.  JCS/JHRS 2021 guideline focused update on non-pharmacotherapy of cardiac arrhythmias.

Authors:  Akihiko Nogami; Takashi Kurita; Kengo Kusano; Masahiko Goya; Morio Shoda; Hiroshi Tada; Shigeto Naito; Teiichi Yamane; Masaomi Kimura; Tsuyoshi Shiga; Kyoko Soejima; Takashi Noda; Hiro Yamasaki; Yoshifusa Aizawa; Tohru Ohe; Takeshi Kimura; Shun Kohsaka; Hideo Mitamura
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2022-01-07

3.  Novel dry pericardiocentesis: Transvenous puncture of the right ventricle with the back end of a 0.014-inch PTCA guidewire and a 1.8 Fr microcatheter.

Authors:  Hua-Di Qin; Hui Gao; Jie Gao; Lin Hou; Xiang-Seng Shao; Jing-Wei Tang; Chun-Chang Qin
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-09-06

4.  Right ventricular lead perforation through the septum, left ventricle, and pleura, managed by an open surgical approach.

Authors:  Alexander Iribarne; Rajbir S Sangha; Ian C Bostock; Eric S Rothstein; Jock N McCullough
Journal:  HeartRhythm Case Rep       Date:  2018-05-23

5.  Outcomes of transvenous lead extraction in patients with lead perforation: A single-center experience.

Authors:  Xu Zhou; Feng Ze; Ding Li; Long Wang; Jihong Guo; Xuebin Li
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 2.882

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.