Celso L Diaz1, Xiaofan Guo2, Isaac R Whitman3, Gregory M Marcus4, Cara N Pellegrini4,5, Ramin E Beygui6, Sun Yong Lee4, Byron K Lee4. 1. Department of Medicine, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. 2. Department of Cardiology, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning Province, China. 3. Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, University of California, 500 Parnassus Avenue, Millberry Union East Room 429, San Francisco, CA, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, San Francisco VAMC, San Francisco, CA, USA. 6. Department of Surgery, Division of Adult Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: Rotating sheaths and laser sheaths are commonly used for transvenous lead extraction. This study aims to compare observed mortality between both approaches. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database was searched from 2011 to 2016 to determine number of deaths associated with each sheath. An independent analytics firm provided estimates for number of cases done, allowing calculation of market share. A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine relative risk (RR) of mortality at the calculated market share (36% rotating/64% laser) and two others. Additional sensitivity analyses assumed underreporting of deaths associated with rotating sheaths. An estimated 50 545 extractions were performed. Thirteen deaths were associated with rotating sheaths compared to 167 with laser sheaths. Of these, 92% (rotating) and 95% (laser) were due to cardiovascular injury. At the calculated market share, the RR of death was 7.2 times greater with laser sheaths [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1-12.7, P < 0.0001]. At market share estimates of 25% rotating/75% laser and 45% rotating/55% laser, the RR of death with laser sheaths was 4.3 (95% CI 2.4-7.5, P < 0.0001) and 10.5 times greater (95% CI 6.0-18.5, P < 0.0001), respectively. The RR of death remained significant when assuming deaths with rotating sheaths were underreported and when deaths using both sheaths were attributed to the rotating sheath. CONCLUSIONS: Lead extraction with laser sheaths appears to be associated with a higher risk of mortality compared to rotating sheaths. Further studies are warranted to confirm this finding. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Rotating sheaths and laser sheaths are commonly used for transvenous lead extraction. This study aims to compare observed mortality between both approaches. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database was searched from 2011 to 2016 to determine number of deaths associated with each sheath. An independent analytics firm provided estimates for number of cases done, allowing calculation of market share. A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine relative risk (RR) of mortality at the calculated market share (36% rotating/64% laser) and two others. Additional sensitivity analyses assumed underreporting of deaths associated with rotating sheaths. An estimated 50 545 extractions were performed. Thirteen deaths were associated with rotating sheaths compared to 167 with laser sheaths. Of these, 92% (rotating) and 95% (laser) were due to cardiovascular injury. At the calculated market share, the RR of death was 7.2 times greater with laser sheaths [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1-12.7, P < 0.0001]. At market share estimates of 25% rotating/75% laser and 45% rotating/55% laser, the RR of death with laser sheaths was 4.3 (95% CI 2.4-7.5, P < 0.0001) and 10.5 times greater (95% CI 6.0-18.5, P < 0.0001), respectively. The RR of death remained significant when assuming deaths with rotating sheaths were underreported and when deaths using both sheaths were attributed to the rotating sheath. CONCLUSIONS: Lead extraction with laser sheaths appears to be associated with a higher risk of mortality compared to rotating sheaths. Further studies are warranted to confirm this finding. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Joseph Boone Muhlestein; Elizabeth Dranow; Jason Chaney; Leenhapong Navaravong; Benjamin A Steinberg; Roger A Freedman Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 6.779
Authors: Christoph T Starck; Elkin Gonzalez; Omar Al-Razzo; Patrizio Mazzone; Peter-Paul Delnoy; Alexander Breitenstein; Jan Steffel; Jürgen Eulert-Grehn; Pia Lanmüller; Francesco Melillo; Alessandra Marzi; Manav Sohal; Giulia Domenichini; Mark M Gallagher Journal: Europace Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Saumya Sharma; Byron K Lee; Anuj Garg; Robert Peyton; Brian T Schuler; Pamela Mason; Peter Paul Delnoy; Mark M Gallagher; Ramesh Hariharan; Raymond Schaerf; Ruirui Du; Nina D Serratore; Christoph T Starck Journal: Heart Rhythm O2 Date: 2021-03-02