Survival of patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy upgraded to CRT does not depend on defibrillation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Permanent right ventricular pacing (RVP) results in cardiac dyssynchrony that may lead to heart failure and may be an indication for the use of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The study aimed to evaluate predictors of outcomes in patients with pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM) if upgraded to CRT. METHODS: One hundred fifteen patients, 75.0 years old (IQR 67.0-80.0), were upgraded to CRT due to the decline in left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) caused by the long-term RVP. A retrospective analysis was performed using data from hospital and outpatient clinic records and survival data from the National Health System. RESULTS: The prior percentage of RVP was 100.0% (IQR 97.0-100.0), with a QRS duration of 180.0 ms (IQR 160.0-200.0). LVEF at the time of the upgrade procedure was 27.0% (IQR 21.0-32.75). The mean follow-up was 980 ± 522 days. The primary endpoint, death from any cause, was met by 26 (22%) patients. Age > 82 years (HR 5.96; 95% CI 2.24-15.89; P = .0004) and pre-CRT implantation LVEF < 20% (HR 5.63; 95%CI 2.19-14.47; P = .0003), but neither the cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation (HR 1.00; 95%CI 0.45-2.22; P = 1.00), nor the presence of atrial fibrillation (HR 1.22; 95%CI 0.56-2.64; P = .62), were independently associated with all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: Advanced age and an extremely low LVEF, but neither the presence of atrial fibrillation nor implanting an additional high voltage lead, influence the all-cause mortality in patients after long-term RVP, when upgraded to CRT.

Transvenous lead extraction safety and efficacy in infected and noninfected patients using mechanical-only tools: Prospective registry from a high-volume center.

BACKGROUND: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is a well-established treatment option for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) complications. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TLE in CIED infection and non-CIED infection patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent TLE between 2016 and 2022 entered the EXTRACT Registry. Models of prediction were constructed for periprocedural clinical and procedural success and the incidence of major complications, including death in 30 days. RESULTS: The registry enrolled 504 patients (mean age 66.6 ± 12.8 years; 65.7% male). Complete procedural success was achieved in 474 patients (94.0%) and clinical success in 492 patients (97.6%). The total number of major and minor complications was 16 (3.2%) and 51 (10%), respectively. Three patients (0.6%) died during the procedure. New York Heart Association functional class IV and C-reactive protein levels defined before the procedure were independent predictors of any major complication, including death in 30 days in CIED infection patients. The time since the last preceding procedure and platelet count before the procedure were independent predictors of any major complication, including death in 30 days in non-CIED infection patients. CONCLUSIONS: TLE is safe and successfully performed in most patients, with a low major complication rate. CIED infection patients demonstrate better periprocedural clinical success and complete procedural success. However, CIED infection predicts higher 30-day mortality compared with non-CIED infection patients. Predictors of any major complication, including death in 30 days, differ between CIED infection and non-CIED infection patients.

Predictors of Early Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Lead Dislodgement in the Elderly.

INTRODUCTION: One of the most frequent cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation complications is lead dislodgement, especially in the older adult population. Little evidence is available about the influence of frailty on the risk of lead dislodgment after CIED implantation procedures; thus, the evaluation of frailty could be relevant for the course and safety of the implantation procedure, especially among the elderly with cardiovascular diseases. This study aimed to assess the risks and predictors of early lead dislodgement in the elderly population. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2021, 14,293 patients underwent implantations. In 400 elderly patients, lead dislodgement was confirmed, and frailty was retrospectively calculated. RESULTS: The most frequent dislodgement according to the lead position was that of the atrial lead (133; 33.3%). In the logistic regression, frailty (OR: 1.8196, 95% CI:1.4991-2.2086; p < 0.0001) and age (OR: 1.0315, 95% CI:1.0005-1.0634; p < 0.0461) were independent predictors of early dislodgement. In the female group, frailty (OR: 2.1185, 95% CI: 1.5530-2.8899; p < 0.0001) was an independent predictor of early dislodgement. Similarly, in the male group, frailty (OR: 1.6321, 95% CI:1.2725-2.0934; p < 0.0001) was an independent predictor of early dislodgement. CONCLUSION: Lead dislodgement often occurs in the elderly. Frailty in both men and women is a predictive factor of early lead dislodgment. Evaluating frailty may be an essential element of proper selection, especially in the elderly undergoing CIED procedures, and, consequently, it could help prevent further complications.