Stepwise transvenous lead extraction due to pacemaker pocket infection following lactational mastitis complicated with breast abscess.

BACKGROUND: Lactational mastitis is a common painful and debilitating inflammation of breast tissue, generally treated conservatively or with pus puncture in case of breast abscess. However, treating mastitis in patients with implantable surgical material located in the affected breast region can be extremely challenging. We present an unusual case of lactational mastitis complicated by pacemaker pocket infection in a breastfeeding mother. CASE PRESENTATION: A 35-year-old pacemaker-dependent female developed lactational mastitis seven weeks postpartum. Initially, the condition was treated conservatively with analgesics and antibiotics. After abscess formation, pus was aspirated using fine-needle aspiration technique. Four weeks after mastitis resolution, pacemaker pocket infection developed. According to current cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection treatment guidelines a complete surgical extraction of the entire electronic system, followed by targeted antibiotic treatment and reimplantation of a new device after infection resolution, was recommended. However, after thorough discussion with the young woman and her family and after detailed review of surgery-related risks, she declined a potentially high-risk surgical procedure. Thus, only the pulse generator was explanted; pacing leads positioned in the sub-pectoral pocket; new pacemaker implanted on the contralateral side and broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy continued for six weeks. After breastfeeding cessation, and with chronic fistula development at the primary pacemaker implantation site, the possibility of delayed surgical intervention including complete extraction of retained pacemaker leads was again thoroughly discussed with her. After thoughtful consideration the woman consented to the proposed treatment strategy. A surgical procedure including transvenous lead extraction through the primary implantation venous entry site, using hand-powered bidirectional rotational sheaths, was successfully performed, removing all retained leads through the left subclavian venous entry site, and leaving the fully functional and clinically uninfected pacemaker on the contralateral site intact. CONCLUSION: Although patients' decisions for delayed extraction in a case of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection should be discouraged by attending physicians and members of interdisciplinary teams, our case shows that a stepwise treatment strategy may be successful as a bailout clinical scenario in patients with specific requests, demands and / or clinical needs.

Electrocardiographic Parameters as Predictors of Response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Although strict selection criteria are used to select patients for cardiac resynchronisation therapy, up to 30% of patients do not have a positive clinical response. PATIENTS: A total of 102 consecutive patients who had biventricular pacemaker/defibrillator (CRT-P or CRT-D) implanted were enrolled in this prospective observational study. RESULTS: During the average follow-up period of 24.3 months 5 patients died and 17 (16.7%) patients were hospitalised with the symptoms of heart failure; 75 (73.5%) patients were responders based on the previously defined criteria. Responders in the group of LBBB patients kept the significant difference in a computed variable (S1 + R6) - (S6 + R1) and R6/S6 ratio. Responders in non-LBBB patients kept the significant difference only in the height of R waves in V6. The R6/S6 ratio tended to be higher, but it did not reach a statistical significance. CONCLUSION: None of the tested ECG parameters stands out as an independent predictor of response to cardiac resynchronisation therapy, but some of them were different in responder-compared to the non-responder group. The amplitude of R wave in V6, higher R/S ratio in V6 and higher computed variable (S1 + R6) - (S6 + R1) may predict the likelihood of response to CRT therapy in both LBBB-patients and non-LBBB patients.

Scoring System Assessment of Cephalic Vein Access for Device Implantation.

The purpose of this study was to explore the usability of the cephalic vein (CV) for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) lead access by applying a scoring system to assess the venous anatomy. This prospective, single-center study included 100 consecutive patients who underwent CIED implantation within a period of one year. Contrast-enhanced venography images were obtained for every patient, focused on the CV, "T-junction," and the subclavian/axillary veins (SV/AVs). Though careful examination of the images, an angle, valves, diameter, noncollateral (AVDnC) score was constructed and used to aid in choosing a CV or SV/AV access approach; in all cases, however, the preferred approach was CV independent of the AVDnC score result obtained. Upon use of the scoring system, the majority of patients (54%) had type A score result (≥ 3), indicating a favorable anatomy for CV access. In 48 of these patients, the CV was used for the implantation of at least one lead. The remaining 46 (46%) patients had type B score result (≤ 2). In 41 patients from this group, SV/AV access was used for lead implantation and, in five patients, CV access was used. The number of leads introduced through the CV was associated with larger score and the operator's experience. In conclusion, in more than 50% of patients, at least one lead could be introduced through the CV. The scoring system used herein can simplify the choice between CV and SV/AV access and could eventually increase the efficiency and safety of the procedure, especially when less experienced implanters are involved.