Transvenous lead advancement in pediatric pacing to overcome growth-induced lead straightening and stretching.

BACKGROUND: The stretching of the lead caused by somatic growth may lead to complications (dislodgement, fracture, failure) of transvenous leads implanted in pediatric patients. Atrial loop and absorbable ligatures may prevent it. Periodical lead advancement with lead pushing from the pocket may be an option to growth-induced stretching. Our aim was to analyze retrospectively the outcome of periodical transvenous lead advancement in children with pacemaker (PM). METHODS: A procedure of lead advancement was performed in patients with a single-chamber PM implanted for isolated congenital complete atrioventricular block or sinus node dysfunction with growth-induced lead straightening/stretching. The PM pocket was opened, the lead was released from subcutaneous adherences and was gently advanced to shape again a loop/semi-loop in the atrium without dislodging the tip. Lead data (threshold, sensing, impedance) were compared before and after the procedure. Data are described as median (25th-75th centiles). RESULTS: 14 patients with 13 VVIR and 1 AAIR PM implanted at 6.8 (5.9-8.0) years of age, 23 (19-26) kg, 118 (108-124) cm, underwent 30 advancement procedures, 1.5 (1.0-2.3) per patient, during follow-up [45 (35-63) months]. Delta between procedures was: 18 (14-25) months, 11 (7-13) cm, 6 (4-9) kg; 90% of leads were successfully advanced without complications. Three unsuccessful procedures occurred with longer times [30 (14-37) months]. Electrical lead parameters did not show significant differences pre-/post-procedures. CONCLUSION: the advancement of transvenous leads in children seems safe and effective. This procedure may be another possible choice to preserve transvenous lead position and function until growth has completed.

A case report of left ventricular lead implantation via total three-dimensional transseptal puncture after tricuspid valve replacement.

Background: Ventricular lead implantation is relatively difficult for patients with bradyarrhythmia after tricuspid valve replacement. Right atrial (RA) abnormalities often occurred in patients with tricuspid valve disease; conventional coronary sinus (CS) lead implantation is not easy to operate. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a safe method for implanting LV endocardial leads in patients after tricuspid valve replacement. Case presentation: A 76-year-old Asian woman who had been implanted with a metal tricuspid valve replacement 4 years ago was admitted to the Department of Cardiology for pacemaker implantation due to transient blackout related to persistent atrial fibrillation with long pauses. The patient's family rejected the surgical placement of an epicardial LV lead. Therefore, we first intended to operate LV lead implantation through the CS; however, the orifice of the CS was virtually difficult to seek. Ultimately, we utilized total 3-dimensional (T3D) transseptal puncture (TSP) under the guidance of the CARTO 3 system; thus, we implanted the LV endocardial lead, which contributed to the accurate puncture of the central fossa ovalis and ensured the safety of TSP in the case of RA enlargement. Meanwhile, the CARTO 3 system contributed to the localization of the LV lead to the LV free wall during implantation. All the intraoperative and postoperative pacemaker parameters were favorable; no intraoperative or postoperative complications occurred. Conclusions: This case report may provide a novel surgical approach for LV lead implantation in patients who underwent tricuspid valve replacement or patients who may benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy but failed to implant CS lead.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients: Developed in collaboration with and endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC) Endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS).

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients: Executive summary.

Guidelines for the implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) have evolved since publication of the initial ACC/AHA pacemaker guidelines in 1984 [1]. CIEDs have evolved to include novel forms of cardiac pacing, the development of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and the introduction of devices for long term monitoring of heart rhythm and other physiologic parameters. In view of the increasing complexity of both devices and patients, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. In 2018, the ACC/AHA/HRS published Guidelines on the Evaluation and Management of Patients with Bradycardia and Cardiac Conduction Delay [2], which were specific recommendations for patients >18 years of age. This age-specific threshold was established in view of the differing indications for CIEDs in young patients as well as size-specific technology factors. Therefore, the following document was developed to update and further delineate indications for the use and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, with recognition that there is often overlap in the care of patents between 18 and 21 years of age. This document is an abbreviated expert consensus statement (ECS) intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease/diagnostic categories. This document will also provide guidance regarding the management of lead systems and follow-up evaluation for pediatric patients with CIEDs. The recommendations are presented in an abbreviated modular format, with each section including the complete table of recommendations along with a brief synopsis of supportive text and select references to provide some context for the recommendations. This document is not intended to provide an exhaustive discussion of the basis for each of the recommendations, which are further addressed in the comprehensive PACES-CIED document [3], with further data easily accessible in electronic searches or textbooks.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

Alternate method for endocardial pacemaker lead implantation: A hybrid mini-thoracotomy approach.

Although the conventional methods for endo-cardial pacemaker lead implantation via subclavian or cephalic or axillary vein routes is common, but sometimes due to anatomical variations it is not feasible to access these veins Emergence of newer techniques are useful for lead implantation. This case report focuses on a hybrid approach of combined mini-thoracotomy for endocardial pacemaker lead implantation. This fluoroscopy guided minimal thoracotomy approach with endocardial MRI compatible lead placement had the benefits of simple procedural, minimal hospital stay, low early complication rates and economically viable to the patient.

Echocardiographic findings in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices-analysis of factors predisposing to lead-associated changes.

BACKGROUND: The constant interaction between intracardiac leads and the heart and veins results in excessive accumulation of fibrous connective tissue around the leads. The extent of this pathological phenomenon, which is visible on transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), and predisposing factors are not well defined. METHODS: We examined 936 transesophageal echocardiograms prior to transvenous lead extraction (TLE) performed at a high-volume centre between 2015 and 2019. RESULTS: The most important echocardiographic findings were fibrous binding sites between leads and cardiovascular structures, lead-to-lead adhesions, excessive lead loops, lead-dependent tricuspid dysfunction (LDTD), asymptomatic masses on endocardial leads (AMEL) and vegetations. Fibrotic reaction within the walls of the heart and veins correlated with the presence of lead loops (OR = 1.771; p < .01) and lead dwell time (OR = 1.111; p < .001). Women were more likely to have excessive lead loops (OR = 1.639; p < .01), and the occurrence of loops increase with the number of implanted leads (OR = 2.557; p < .001). Heart failure (OR = 4.016; p < .001), lead looping (OR = 2.603; p < .01) and longer cumulative lead dwell time (OR = 1.017; p < .05) increased the likelihood of LDTD. A variety of AMEL were identified in this study, most commonly in patients with older leads (OR = 1.043; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Lead dwell time is the main factor predisposing to the occurrence of most lead-associated phenomena visualized by TEE in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED). Excessive looping of the lead is an important cause of fibrous binding sites and LDTD. AMEL are frequently detected in CIED patients, and their various forms concurrent with vegetations could represent an evolutionary stage of lead-associated masses.

[Cardiac remodelling and function after cardiovascular implantable electronic devices implantation]. / Przebudowa i funkcja serca po implantacji wszczepialnych sercowo-naczyniowych urzadzen elektronicznych.

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) encompass permanent cardiac pacemakers (PM) and implantable cardioverterdefibrillators (ICD). CIED play an important role in treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, including significant bradyarrhythmias and tachyarrhythmias. The conventional right ventricular endocardial leads as well as right ventricular pacing may increase valvular defects (especially dysfunction of tricuspid and mitral valve), cause adverse cardiac remodelling and lead to a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction. These changes may be due to mechanical damage to the leaflets or other structures of the tricuspid apparatus, such as the annulus, papillary muscles or chordae tendineae. In addition, the endocardial lead passing through the tricuspid valve may adhere to it and exacerbate the inflammatory processes and fibrosis of its leaflets. On the other hand, right ventricular pacing leads to electromechanical dyssynchrony of the cardiac muscle. New forms of CIED therapy such as leadless pacemakers, His bundle pacing, synchronized left ventricular pacing or biventricular pacing may reduce some adverse changes induced by the right ventricular pacing with the use of conventional cardiac pacemakers. Similarly, subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillators, despite limitations, may prevent some complications associated with traditional implantable cardioverterdefibrillator lead.

Tricuspid Regurgitation Following Implantation of Endocardial Leads: Incidence and Predictors.

BACKGROUND: Endocardial leads, permanent pacemaker (PPM), or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) placed across the tricuspid valve can lead to tricuspid regurgitation (TR). The reported incidence of this complication has varied widely. There are limited data predicting which patients will develop this complication. This study sought to describe the incidence of worsening TR post-PPM or ICD and to identify patient-specific predictors of increased TR following lead placement. METHODS: Patients (N = 382) who received a PPM or ICD from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010 and had echocardiograms both within 365 days prior to and up to 1,200 days after device placement were studied. TR was assessed on a 6-point scale (none/trace, mild, mild to moderate, moderate, moderate to severe, severe). Primary outcome was a two-grade increase in the severity of TR. Echocardiographic and clinical predictors of worsening TR were examined using multivariate regression. RESULTS: A two-grade increase in TR occurred in 10.0% of our patient population. Age, lead position, atrial fibrillation, right atrial (RA) area, right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP), left atrial area, and severity of mitral regurgitation were univariate predictors of worsening TR post lead placement. In the multivariate analysis, predevice RA area and RVSP were associated with increased TR after endocardial lead placement. Percentage of time spent pacing did not appear to be associated with increased TR. CONCLUSION: The incidence of increased TR postendocardial lead placement was 10.0%; this is lower than prior estimates. Predevice RA area and RVSP are predictors of increased TR after lead placement.

Transvenous extraction of an abandoned endocardial pacemaker lead in a dog.

A 6-year-old male castrated labrador retriever presented with endocardial pacemaker infection following migration and subsequent repositioning of the pulse generator. An epicardial lead and pulse generator were surgically implanted and the endocardial lead could not be removed with manual traction. The endocardial lead was severed, anchored, and abandoned at the thoracic inlet. The patient presented 4 months later with endocardial lead migration, bacteremia, and suspected glomerulonephritis. The endocardial pacemaker lead was transvenously extracted using a mechanical dilator sheath and locking stylet. This report of transvenous pacemaker lead extraction in a dog addresses the challenges and describes recent advances in extraction devices.

Comparação de desempenho entre duas gerações de eletrodos de fixação ativa com esteroides e superfície fractal / Performance comparison between two generation of active fixation leads with steroids and fractal surface / Comparación de desempeño entre dos generaciones de electrodos de fijación activa con esteroides y superficie fractal

Grande parte do sucesso e eficácia de um sistema de estimulação cardíaca artificial é, diretamente, devido a performance dos eletrodos utilizados. Os eletrodos endocárdicos são também os itens que estão mais expostos à ação deletéria do agressivo ambiente em que são instalados. Na evolução técnica desses itens, observa-se principalmente: a facilidade de uso durante o implante; a otimização dos resultados paramétricos e a busca pela máxima confiabilidade. Assim, o presente trabalho compara o desempenho de duas gerações consecutivas de eletrodos bipolares endocárdicos de fixação ativa, da empresa Biotronil GmbH: os modelos Selox SR e Setrox S. Este estudo clínico envolveu 175 Setrox S(43 VVI e 66 DDD - 66 atriais e 109 ventriculares) e 79 Selox SR (SR VVI e 22 DDD - 22 atriais e 57 eletrodos ventriculares), no período de trinta e oito meses. Além dos parâmetros elétricos dos eletrodos...

Much of the success and effectiveness of an artificial cardiac pacing system is directly due to the performance of electrodes in use. The endocardial electrodes are also items that are mostexposed to any deleterious effects from the aggressive environment in which they are installed. It is observed in the technical evolution of these items, namely: the ease of use during the implantation, the optimization of electrical parameters and search for maximum reliability. Thus, this study compares the performance of two consecutive generations of bipolar endocardial electrodes of active fixation, from the company Biotronik GmbH: the models Selox SR and Setrox S. This clinical study involving 175 Setrox S (43 VVI and 66 DDD - 66 atrial and 109 ventricular) and 79 Selox SR (35 VVI and 22 DDD - 22 atrialand 57 ventricular leads) during the thirty-eight months. In addition to the electrical parameters of electrodes...

Gran parte del éxito y la eficacia de un sistema de estimulación cardiaca artificial se debe directamente al desempeño de los electrodos utilizados. Los electrodos endocárdicos son asimismo los componentes que están más expuestos a la acción deletérea del agresivo entorno en el que se los instala.En la evolución técnica de dichos componentes se advierte especialmente: la facilidad de manejo durante el implante; la optimización de los resultados paramétricos y la búsqueda por la máxima confiabilidad. De esa manera, el presente trabajo compara el desempeño de dos generaciones consecutivas de electrodos bipolares endocárdicos de fijación activa, de la empresa Biotronik GmbH: los modelos Selox SR y SetroxS. Este estudio clínico abarcó 175 Setrox S (43 VVI y 66 DDD - 66 auriculares y 109 ventriculares) y 79Selox SR (35 VVI y 22 DDD - 22 auriculares y 57 electrodos ventriculares), en el período de treinta y ocho meses. Además de los parámetros eléctricos de los electrodos...