Literature DB >> 29427820

Techniques for successful early retrieval of the Micra transcatheter pacing system: A worldwide experience.

Muhammad R Afzal1, Emile G Daoud1, Ryan Cunnane2, Shiva K Mulpuru3, Alan Koay4, Azlan Hussain4, Razali Omar4, Koh Kok Wei4, Anish Amin5, Gregory Kidwell5, Nirav Patel6, Charles Love7, Michael Lloyd8, Maciej Sterliński9, Seth Goldbarg10, Miguel A Leal11, James Gabriels12, Apoor Patel12, Ram Jadonath12, Eric Grubman13, George Crossley14, Chris Pepper15, Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy16, Toshimasa Okabe1, John D Hummel1, Ralph S Augostini17.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Experience with retrieval of the Micra transcatheter pacing system (TPS) is limited because of its relatively newer technology. Although abandonment of the TPS at end of life is recommended, certain situations such as endovascular infection or device embolization warrant retrieval.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report the worldwide experience with successful retrieval of the Micra TPS.
METHODS: A list of all successful retrievals of the currently available leadless pacemakers (LPs) was obtained from the manufacturer of Micra TPS. Pertinent details of retrieval, such as indication, days postimplantation, equipment used, complications, and postretrieval management, were obtained from the database collected by the manufacturer. Other procedural details were obtained directly from the operators at each participating site.
RESULTS: Data from the manufacturer consisted of 40 successful retrievals of the Micra TPS. Operators for 29 retrievals (73%) provided the consent and procedural details. Of the 29 retrievals, 11 patients underwent retrieval during the initial procedure (immediate retrieval); the other 18 patients underwent retrieval during a separate procedure (delayed retrieval). Median duration before delayed retrieval was 46 days (range 1-95 days). The most common reason for immediate retrieval was elevated pacing threshold after tether removal. The most common reasons for delayed retrieval included elevated pacing threshold at follow-up, endovascular infection, and need for transvenous device. Mean procedure duration was 63.11 ± 56 minutes. All retrievals involved snaring via a Micra TPS delivery catheter or steerable sheath. No serious complications occurred during the reported retrievals.
CONCLUSION: Early retrieval of the Micra TPS is feasible and safe.
Copyright © 2018 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac implantable electronic device; Elevated threshold; Leadless pacemaker; Micra transcatheter pacing system; Retrieval

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29427820     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2018.02.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Rhythm        ISSN: 1547-5271            Impact factor:   6.343


  10 in total

Review 1.  [Micra™ leadless pacemaker : Clinical experience and perspectives].

Authors:  Clemens Steinwender; Hermann Blessberger; Daniel Kiblböck; Karim Saleh; Jürgen Kammler
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2018-11-19

Review 2.  [Leadless pacemakers and subcutaneously implantable cardioverter defibrillators].

Authors:  C Stellbrink; B Hansky; D Meyer Zu Vilsendorf
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 0.743

Review 3.  Leadless Pacemakers: Recent and Future Developments.

Authors:  Anne Kroman; Basil Saour; Jordan M Prutkin
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2019-09-05

4.  Comparison of the safety and efficacy of Nanostim and Micra transcatheter leadless pacemaker (LP) extractions: a multicenter experience.

Authors:  Tawseef Dar; Krishna Akella; Ghulam Murtaza; Sharan Sharma; Muhammad R Afzal; Rakesh Gopinathannair; Ralph Augostini; John Hummel; Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 1.900

5.  Leadless pacemakers: a contemporary review.

Authors:  Neal Bhatia; Mikhael El-Chami
Journal:  J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 3.327

6.  Retrieval of a Micra transcatheter pacing system in a heart with a preexisting lead.

Authors:  Junji Morita; Masato Fukunaga; Kenichi Hiroshima; Michio Nagashima; Mizuki Miura; Kenji Ando
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2018-05-25

7.  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

8.  Micra leadless pacemaker retrieval in a pediatric patient.

Authors:  Erick Jimenez; Varun Aggarwal; John Bass; Daniel Cortez
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2020-03-25

Review 9.  State of the art: leadless ventricular pacing : A national expert consensus of the Austrian Society of Cardiology.

Authors:  C Steinwender; P Lercher; C Schukro; H Blessberger; G Prenner; M Andreas; J Kraus; M Ammer; M Stühlinger
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 1.900

10.  Incidence of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in pacemaker-dependent patients is lower with leadless pacemakers compared to transvenous pacemakers.

Authors:  Reynaldo Sanchez; Anish Nadkarni; Benjamin Buck; Georges Daoud; Tanner Koppert; Toshimasa Okabe; Mahmoud Houmsse; Raul Weiss; Ralph Augostini; John D Hummel; Steven Kalbfleisch; Emile G Daoud; Muhammad R Afzal
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-11-25
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.