Safety of transvenous lead extraction according to centre volume: a systematic review and meta-analysis (original) (raw)
Related papers
Europace, 2012
Current practice with regard to transvenous lead extraction among European implanting centres was analysed by this survey. Methods and results Among all contacted centres, 164, from 30 countries, declared that they perform transvenous lead extraction and answered 58 questions with a compliance rate of 99.9%. Data from the survey show that there seems to be an overall increasing experience of managing various techniques of lead extraction and a widespread involvement of cardiac centres in this treatment. Results and complication rates seem comparable with those of main international registries. Conclusion This survey gives an interesting snapshot of lead extraction in Europe today and gives some clues for future research and prospective European registries.
EP Europace, 2020
Aims Several large studies have documented the outcome of transvenous lead extraction (TLE), focusing on laser and mechanical methods. To date there has been no large series addressing the results obtained with rotational lead extraction tools. This retrospective multicentre study was designed to investigate the outcomes of mechanical and rotational techniques. Methods and results Data were collected on a total of 2205 patients (age 66.0 ± 15.7 years) with 3849 leads targeted for extraction in six European lead extraction centres. The commonest indication was infection (46%). The targeted leads included 2879 pacemaker leads (74.8%), 949 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads (24.6%), and 21 leads for which details were unknown; 46.6% of leads were passive fixation leads. The median lead dwell time was 74 months [interquartile range (IQR) 41–112]. Clinical success was obtained in 97.0% of procedures, and complete extraction was achieved for 96.5% of leads. Major complications o...
Kardiologia Polska, 2022
Background: Scant data exist on long-term outcomes, including death, in patients with complications related to transvenous lead extractions (TLE). Aims: We sought to characterize the population and examine the outcomes including risk factors for in-hospital complications and 12-month mortality and morbidity related to the complications in a large administrative database of patients undergoing TLE. Results: From the database of patients hospitalized for cardiovascular diseases and included in the Silesian Cardiovascular Database (SILCARD) registry, we selected the admissions of those who underwent TLE according to the appropriate ICD-9 codes. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether they did or did not manifest any complications during their hospitalization for the TLE procedure. Between 2007 and 2019, we found a total of 835 patients who underwent TLE. TLE-related complications occurred in 56 patients (6.7%) of the Complications-Yes group while no complications were recorded in 779 (93.3%) patients of the Complications-No group. A significant difference in the rate of all-cause mortality (23.9% vs. 6.5%; P <0.001) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (58.7% vs. 39.4%; P = 0.01) between the Complications-Yes and Complications-No groups were recorded. Multivariable analysis of the entire study population revealed that prior dialysis, chronic kidney disease, and ventricular tachycardia were independent factors of a higher risk of TLE-related in-hospital complications. Multivariable analysis of the patients discharged from the hospital after the TLE procedure showed that TLE-related complications, a history of heart failure, and older age independently affected 12-month mortality. Conclusions: The presence of TLE-related in-hospital complications increased 12-month mortality.
EP Europace, 2021
Aims The aims of this study is to characterize the transvenous lead extraction (TLE) population with active (A) compared with passive fixation (PFix) leads and to compare the safety, efficacy, and ease of extracting active fixation (AFix) compared with PFix right atrial (RA) and right ventricular (RV) leads. Methods and results The European Lead Extraction ConTRolled Registry (ELECTRa) was analysed. Patients were divided into three groups; those with only AFix, only PFix, and combined Fix leads. Three outcomes were defined. Difficult extraction, complete radiological, and clinical success. Multivariate model was used to analyse the independent effect of Fix mechanism on these outcomes. The study included 2815 patients, 1456 (51.7%) with only AFix leads, 982 (34.9%) with only PFix leads, and 377 (13.4%) with combined Fix leads. Patients with AFix leads were younger with shorter lead dwelling time. Infection was the leading cause for TLE among the combined Fix group with lowest rates ...
Twenty-year experience of transvenous lead extraction at a single centre
Europace, 2014
Indications for cardiovascular implantable electronic devices continue to evolve, which has led to an increasing requirement for transvenous lead extraction. We explore the indications, complications, and success rates involved in the removal of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads in a high-volume centre, over 20 years.
EP Europace, 2021
Aims Transvenous lead extraction is associated with a significant risk of complications and identifying patients at highest risk pre-procedurally will enable interventions to be planned accordingly. We developed the ELECTRa Registry Outcome Score (EROS) and applied it to the ELECTRa registry to determine if it could appropriately risk-stratify patients. Methods and results EROS was devised to risk-stratify patients into low risk (EROS 1), intermediate risk (EROS 2), and high risk (EROS 3). This was applied to the ESC EORP European Lead Extraction ConTRolled ELECTRa registry; 57.5% EROS 1, 31.8% EROS 2, and 10.7% EROS 3. Patients with EROS 3 or 2 were significantly more likely to require powered sheaths and a femoral approach to complete procedures. Patients with EROS 3 were more likely to suffer procedure-related major complications including deaths (5.1 vs. 1.3%; P < 0.0001), both intra-procedural (3.5 vs. 0.8%; P = 0.0001) and post-procedural (1.6 vs. 0.5%; P = 0.0192). They we...
Contributions of Advanced Techniques to the Success and Safety of Transvenous Leads Extraction
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2009
We measured the proportion of intravascular leads, which can be extracted by simple traction versus with newer techniques, and examined the overall safety and success rate of lead extractions. Between January 2005 and December 2007, 311 consecutive patients (mean age = 70 +/- 14 years, 79% men) underwent extractions of 250 atrial, 318 ventricular, and 22 coronary sinus leads, in the surgical facilities of two experienced medical centers, under general anesthesia, at a mean of 7.2 +/- 5.1 years (range 0.1-27.0) after lead implantation. Infection was the indication for extraction in 67.5% of cases. Complementary techniques were used when simple extraction with a locking stylet was unsuccessful. Simple traction, with or without a locking stylet, allowed the complete removal in 27.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.1-31.9) of patients. A mechanical sheath, laser sheath, and/or lasso catheter were used in the remaining patients. The overall extraction success rate was 89.7% (95% CI 86.3-93.1). There was one procedure-related death (0.3%; 95% CI 0.0-1.0). Among five other deaths occurring within 10 days after the procedure, four were due to septic shock. Duration of lead implantation was the strongest independent predictor of major adverse events (P = 0.002) and incomplete lead extraction (P = 0.005). In contrast with simple traction, advanced techniques allowed the complete extraction of nearly 90% of leads. In experienced hands and with surgical back-up, these techniques were safe. Patients presenting with infected implanted cardiac devices suffered a high rate of major adverse despite complete extraction of the lead(s).
Practical Approaches to Transvenous Lead Extraction Procedures—Clinical Case Series
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is regarded as the first-line strategy for the management of complications associated with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), when lead removal is mandatory. The decision to perform a lead extraction should take into consideration not only the strength of the clinical indication for the procedure but also many other factors such as risks versus benefits, extractor and team experience, and even patient preference. TLE is a procedure with a possible high risk of complications. In this paper, we present three clinical cases of patients who presented different indications of TLE and explain how the procedures were successfully performed. In the first clinical case, TLE was necessary because of device extravasation and suspicion of CIED pocket infection. In the second clinical case, TLE was necessary because occlusion of the left subclavian vein was found when an upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy was performed. In the last clinica...