Abstract: Background: A challenging decision exists as whether to abandon or remove noninfectious superfluous leads during lead revisions or cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) upgrades. There is insufficient data in the Asian population to guide decision making.
Methods: This study investigated the safety and efficacy of transvenous lead extractions (TLEs) in a high-volume Japanese center. Among a total of 341 patients who underwent lead revisions or CIED upgrades between 2008 and 2018, 53 patients (16%) who underwent TLEs to remove the superfluous leads were analyzed.
Results: Indications for TLE were vascular issues (60%), recalled leads (21%), growth of the body size (6%), abandoned leads in young patients (6%), switch to a subcutaneous implanted cardiac defibrillator (4%), need for an MRI conditional CIED (2%), and risks of vascular injury (2%). The population included 29 patients (55%) with nonfunctional leads and 24 (45%) with functional abandoned leads. A total of 74 target leads (mean 1.4 leads/person, median lead age 6.7 years) were extracted with a complete removal achieved in 98%. All coexisting leads, intended for continued use, were not damaged. All new leads (mean 1.4 leads/person) that had been simultaneously implanted during the TLE procedures were successfully implanted. There was one minor complication (2%) involving a pericardial effusion but it did not affect the hemodynamics.
Conclusions: In this Japanese single center experience, the removal of noninfectious superfluous leads with TLEs seemed to be a safe and effective therapeutic option.
(© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)
References: Hammill SC, Kremers MS, Kadish AH, et al. Review of the ICD Registry's third year, expansion to include lead data and pediatric ICD procedures, and role for measuring performance. Heart Rhythm. 2009;6:1397-1401.
Kusumoto F, Schoenfeld M, Wilkoff B, et al. HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:e503-e551.
Sood N, Martin DT, Lampert R, Curtis JP, Parzynski C, Clancy J. Incidence and predictors of perioperative complications with transvenous lead extractions: Real-World experience with national cardiovascular data registry. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018;11:e004768.
Eckstein J, Koller MT, Zabel M, et al. Necessity for surgical revision of defibrillator leads implanted long-term: Causes and management. Circulation. 2008;117:2727-2733.
Ellenbogen KA, Wood MA, Shepard RK, et al. Detection and management of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead failure: Incidence and clinical implications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:73-80.
Vatankulu MA, Goktekin O, Kaya MG, et al. Effect of long-term resynchronization therapy on left ventricular remodeling in pacemaker patients upgraded to biventricular devices. Am J Cardiol. 2009;103:1280-1284.
Foley PW, Muhyaldeen SA, Chalil S, Smith RE, Sanderson JE, Leyva F. Long-term effects of upgrading from right ventricular pacing to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure. Europace. 2009;11:495-501.
Suga C, Hayes DL, Hyberger LK, Lloyd MA. Is there an adverse outcome from abandoned pacing leads? J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2000;4:493-499.
Parry G, Goudevenos J, Jameson S, Adams PC, Gold RG. Complications associated with retained pacemaker leads. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1991;14:1251-1257.
Melzer C, Lembcke A, Ziemer S, et al. Pacemaker-induced superior vena cava syndrome: Clinical evaluation of long-term follow-up. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2006;29:1346-1351.
Amelot M, Foucault A, Scanu P, et al. Comparison of outcomes in patients with abandoned versus extracted implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2011;104:572-577.
Rijal S, Shah RU, Saba S. Extracting versus abandoning sterile pacemaker and defibrillator leads. Am J Cardiol. 2015;115:1107-1110.
Imai K. Lead extraction in a non-infectious situation - it's becoming a major cause gradually. J Cardiol. 2018;72:314-315.
Zeitler EP, Wang Y, Dharmarajan K, et al. Outcomes 1 year after implantable cardioverterdefibrillator lead abandonment versus explantation for unused or malfunctioning leads: A report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2016;9:e003953.
Poole JE, Gleva MJ, Mela T, et al. REPLACE Registry Investigators. Complication rates associated with pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacements and upgrade procedures: Results from the REPLACE registry. Circulation. 2010;122:1553-1561.
Wilkoff BL, Love CJ, Byrd CL, et al. Heart Rhythm Society; American Heart Association. Transvenous lead extraction: Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus on facilities, training, indications, and patient management: this document was endorsed by the American Heart Association (AHA). Heart Rhythm. 2009;6:1085-1104.
Deshmukh A, Patel N, Noseworthy PA, et al. Trends in use and adverse outcomes associated with transvenous lead removal in the United States. Circulation. 2015;132:2363-2371.
Zucchelli G, Di Cori A, Segreti L, et al. Major cardiac and vascular complications after transvenous lead extraction: Acute outcome and predictive factors from the ESC-EHRA ELECTRa (European Lead Extraction ConTRolled) registry. Europace. 2018;21:771-780.
Witte OA, Adiyaman A, van Bemmel MW, et al. Mechanical power sheath mediated recanalization and lead implantation in patients with venous occlusion: Technique and results. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018;29:316-321.
McCanta AC, Tanel RE, Gralla J, Runciman DM, Collins KK. The fate of nontargeted endocardial leads during the extraction of one or more targeted leads in pediatrics and congenital heart disease. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2014;37:104-108.
Processing Request
No Comments.