Transvenous Extraction Performance of Expanded Polytetrafluoroethylene Covered ICD Leads in Comparison to Traditional ICD Leads in Humans (original) (raw)
Related papers
Pace-pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2010
Background: In the Endotak Reliance G defibrillating leads (Guidant Corporation, St. Paul, MN, USA), coils are covered with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) to prevent tissue ingrowth. The aim of the study was to evaluate transvenous extraction performance, outcomes, and fibrotic adherences rate of ePTFE defibrillating leads in comparison to traditional non-ePTFE cardiac defibrillator (ICD) leads.Methods: Seventeen consecutive ICD recipients (ePTFE Group A, 16 men, mean age 66 ± 12 years) with 17 Endotak Reliance G dual-coil ICD leads (mean implantation time 23 ± 26 months) underwent a transvenous removal procedure. They were compared with two control groups, including 20 Sprint Quattro 6944 (non-ePTFE Group B; Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) and 36 Riata 1570 ICD leads (non-ePTFE Group C; St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, USA). The indication for lead extraction was local infection in 35 patients (48%), sepsis in 24 patients (33%), and lead malfunction in 14 patients (19%).Results: In all groups, all leads were successfully and completely removed without major complications. Overall manual traction was effective in six patients (8%) and more effective in the ePTFE Group (29%) compared to Group B (0%) and Group C (3%) (P = 0.001). Sixty-seven leads (92%) required mechanical dilatation by the venous entry site approach, with a shorter extraction time in the ePTFE Group (5 ± 11 min) compared to Group B (21 ± 22 min) and Group C (16 ± 22 min) (P = 0.003). ePTFE leads showed a lower rate of fibrotic adherences at the superior vena cava level (P = 0.01) without statistically significant differences in the other sites.Conclusions: ePTFE-covered leads may be removed more easily and quickly than non-ePTFE leads, requiring less frequently mechanical dilatation. (PACE 2010; 1376–1381)
Heart rhythm : the official journal of the Heart Rhythm Society, 2014
Percutaneous removal of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads is a difficult procedure because of the consequence of massive fibrous tissue growth along the lead. The purpose of this study was to describe the occurrence and location of fibrous adherences in ICD lead extraction and to identify potential predictors among patient and lead characteristics. We studied 637 consecutive patients who underwent transvenous extraction of 678 ICD leads from 1997 to 2013. Procedural success rate was 99%, without major complications. Areas of adherence were found in the subclavian vein (78%), innominate vein (65%), superior vena cava (66%), and heart (73%). Dwell-time, passive fixation, and dual-coil lead design were independently associated with adherences. Dual-coil lead design was associated with adherences in the innominate vein and superior vena cava, whereas coil treatment (eg, expandable polytetrafluoroethylene-coated or medical adhesive back-filled strategies) prevented adher...
Extraction Of Transvenous ICD Leads In An Over-ninety Years Old Patient
Indian pacing and electrophysiology journal, 2011
There is a general consensus that once a part of an implanted cardiac device becomes infected, it is usually impossible to cure the infection without completely removing all prosthetic material from the body. Consequently the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) included the pocket infection or erosion as a class I indication for pacemaker lead exctraction. However, the procedure still carries a high risk of life-threatening complications due to fibrotic attachments between leads, veins, valves or other endocardial structures, notwithstanding specific tools and techniques that have been developed to assist the lead removal, preventing tissue laceration.
The effectiveness of transvenous leads extractions implanted more than 10 years before
Cardiology Journal, 2014
Background: The increasing number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) causes a rise in the absolute percentage of individuals qualifying for a transvenous lead extraction (TLE) due to infectious, vascular or lead failure related indications. As the survival time prolongs, TLE procedures more and more often concern the electrodes of long-term functioning. Authors provide a retrospective analysis of the effectiveness and safety of TLE performed on leads implanted at least 10 years before the extraction. Methods: Between 2008 and 2012 we performed TLE of 364 electrodes in 217 patients. Out of these, 66 (18.1%) leads in 43 (19.8%) patients had been implanted for at least 10 years. The mean dwelling time for electrodes was 161 months (120 to 330). In 62% of cases CIED-related infection was an indication for TLE. The following extracting techniques were used: manual direct traction, device traction, mechanical telescopic sheaths, autorotational cutting sheaths and femoral approach. Results: Fifty-eight pacemakers and 8 defibrillating leads were extracted. Sixty-three (95%) completely, in the remaining 3 cases the clinical success was achieved with the small portion of the lead left into the vascular space. No major procedure complications were observed; minor complications were found in 3 (6%) patients. Conclusions: TLE with the use of various endovascular techniques is an effective and safe method for treating infectious, vascular and mechanical complications of long-lasting CIEDs therapy.
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).
Transvenous extraction of pacing and defibrillator leads--a single-centre experience
Acta cardiologica, 2012
Worldwide, the number of transvenous extractions of chronically implanted endocardial leads rapidly increases. Despite great technical progress, lead extraction remains a challenging procedure with possible life-threatening complications. We present the success and complication rate of lead extractions in the University Hospitals Leuven, and investigated a possible relationship between the use of powered sheaths and lead type, fixation, location and implantation time. We present an observational retrospective cohort study of 157 patients admitted to the University Hospitals Leuven between January 2005 and December 2010, for the transvenous removal of a total of 259 endocardial leads. Complete procedural success was achieved in 92% of patients (n = 144). Of all leads, 94% (n = 243) were completely extracted. Only in 5 patients (3%), lead extraction failed. Leads that could not be removed were significantly older (134.1 +/- 90.7 months vs. 73.1 +/- 61.9 months; P = 0.02). In the other...