PURPOSE: Lead dislocations of pacemaker systems are reported in all and even in high-volume centers. Repeated procedures necessitated by lead dislocations are associated with an increased risk of complications. We investigated a minimal invasive method for right atrial and ventricular lead repositioning. METHODS: The minimal invasive method was applied only when passive fixation leads were implanted. During the minimal invasive procedure, a steerable catheter was advanced through the femoral vein to move the distal end of the lead to the appropriate position. Retrospective data collection was conducted in all patients with minimal invasive and with conventional method, at a single center between September 2006 and December 2012. RESULTS: Forty-five minimal invasive lead repositionings were performed, of which eight were acutely unsuccessful and nine electrodes re-dislocated after the procedure. One hundred two leads were repositioned with opening of the pocket during the same time, including the ones with unsuccessful minimal invasive repositionings. One procedure was acutely unsuccessful in this group and four re-dislocations happened. A significant difference of success rates was noted (66.6% vs. 95.1%, p = 0.001). One complication was observed during the minimal invasive lead repositionings (left ventricular lead microdislodgement). Open-pocket procedures showed different types of complications (pneumothorax, subclavian artery puncture, pericardial effusion, hematoma, fever, device-associated infection which necessitated explantation, atrial lead dislodgement while repositioning the ventricular one, deterioration of renal function). CONCLUSIONS: The minimal invasive method as a first alternative is safe and feasible. In those cases when it cannot be carried out successfully, the conventional method is applicable.
PURPOSE: Lead dislocations of pacemaker systems are reported in all and even in high-volume centers. Repeated procedures necessitated by lead dislocations are associated with an increased risk of complications. We investigated a minimal invasive method for right atrial and ventricular lead repositioning. METHODS: The minimal invasive method was applied only when passive fixation leads were implanted. During the minimal invasive procedure, a steerable catheter was advanced through the femoral vein to move the distal end of the lead to the appropriate position. Retrospective data collection was conducted in all patients with minimal invasive and with conventional method, at a single center between September 2006 and December 2012. RESULTS: Forty-five minimal invasive lead repositionings were performed, of which eight were acutely unsuccessful and nine electrodes re-dislocated after the procedure. One hundred two leads were repositioned with opening of the pocket during the same time, including the ones with unsuccessful minimal invasive repositionings. One procedure was acutely unsuccessful in this group and four re-dislocations happened. A significant difference of success rates was noted (66.6% vs. 95.1%, p = 0.001). One complication was observed during the minimal invasive lead repositionings (left ventricular lead microdislodgement). Open-pocket procedures showed different types of complications (pneumothorax, subclavian artery puncture, pericardial effusion, hematoma, fever, device-associated infection which necessitated explantation, atrial lead dislodgement while repositioning the ventricular one, deterioration of renal function). CONCLUSIONS: The minimal invasive method as a first alternative is safe and feasible. In those cases when it cannot be carried out successfully, the conventional method is applicable.
Entities:
Keywords:
Device infection; Lead dislocation; Minimal invasive procedure; Pacemaker complication; Pacemaker lead repositioning
Authors: Maciej Sterliński; Andrzej Przybylski; Aleksander Maciag; Paweł Syska; Mariusz Pytkowski; Michał Lewandowski; Ilona Kowalik; Bohdan Firek; Piotr Kołsut; Grzegorz Religa; Mariusz Kuśmierczyk; Franciszek Walczak; Hanna Szwed Journal: Europace Date: 2008-12-24 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Erik O Udo; Nicolaas P A Zuithoff; Norbert M van Hemel; Carel C de Cock; Thijs Hendriks; Pieter A Doevendans; Karel G M Moons Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2011-12-17 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: David M Luria; Micha S Feinberg; Osnat T Gurevitz; David S Bar-Lev; Chava Granit; Nechemia Tanami; Michael Eldar; Michael Glikson Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 1.976