Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in patients with permanent pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: Although cardiac device infections (CDIs) are a devastating complication of permanent pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, the incidence of CDI in patients with bacteremia is not well defined. The objective of this study was to determine the incidence of CDI among patients with permanent pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators who develop Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort of all adult patients with SAB and permanent pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators over a 6-year period was evaluated prospectively. The overall incidence of confirmed CDI was 15 of 33 (45.4%). Confirmed CDI occurred in 9 of the 12 patients (75%) with early SAB (<1 year after device placement). Fifteen of 21 patients (71.5%) with late SAB (>/=1 year after device placement) had either confirmed (6 of 21, 28.5%) or possible (9 of 21, 43%) CDI. In 60% of the patients (9 of 15) with confirmed CDI, no local signs or symptoms suggesting generator pocket infection were noted. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of CDI among patients with SAB and cardiac devices is high. Neither physical examination nor echocardiography can exclude the possibility of CDI. In patients with early SAB, the device is usually involved, and approximately 40% of these patients have obvious clinical signs of cardiac device involvement. Conversely, in patients with late SAB, the cardiac device is rarely the initial source of bacteremia, and there is a paucity of local signs of device involvement. The cardiac device is involved, however, in >/=28% of these patients.

Pacemaker lead extraction with the laser sheath: results of the pacing lead extraction with the excimer sheath (PLEXES) trial.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of pacemaker lead extraction with the excimer sheath in comparison to nonlaser lead extraction. BACKGROUND: Fibrotic attachments that develop between chronically implanted pacemaker leads and to the venous, valvular and cardiac structures are the major obstacles to safe and consistent lead extraction. Locking stylets and telescoping sheaths produce a technically demanding but effective technique of mechanically disrupting the fibrosis. However, ultraviolet excimer laser light dissolves instead of tearing the tissue attachments. METHODS: A randomized trial of lead extraction was conducted in 301 patients with 465 chronically implanted pacemaker leads. The laser group patients had the leads removed with identical tools as the nonlaser group with the exception that the inner telescoping sheath was replaced with the 12-F excimer laser sheath. Success for both groups was defined as complete lead removal with the randomized therapy without complications. RESULTS: Complete lead removal rate was 94% in the laser group and 64% in the nonlaser group (p = 0.001). Failed nonlaser extraction was completed with the laser tools 88% of the time. The mean time to achieve a successful lead extraction was significantly reduced for patients randomized to the laser tools, 10.1 +/- 11.5 min compared with 12.9 +/- 19.2 min for patients randomized to nonlaser techniques (p < 0.04). Potentially life-threatening complications occurred in none of the nonlaser and three of the laser patients, including one death (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Laser-assisted pacemaker lead extraction has significant clinical advantages over extraction without laser tools and is associated with significant risks.

Bundle branch reentry tachycardia and possible sustained interfascicular reentry tachycardia with a shared unusual induction pattern.

A case of bundle branch reentry tachycardia with an unusual induction pattern is presented. Unlike typical cases of this arrhythmia in which tachycardia is usually inducible with routine programmed ventricular stimulation and/or short-long sequences, tachycardia in this case was inducible only with atrial stimulation. It also arose spontaneously during atrial flutter and during isoproterenol administration. After ablation of the right bundle, possible interfascicular reentry tachycardia with a similar induction pattern was observed. This tachycardia was successfully ablated in the region of the posterior fascicle of the left bundle branch.

Catheter ablation of sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates 1) the safety and efficacy of catheter delivery of radiofrequency current to eliminate sustained sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia; 2) the incidence of sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia in the current group of patients undergoing electrophysiologic study for paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia; and 3) the association of sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia with other tachyarrhythmias. BACKGROUND: Sustained sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia is an uncommon cause of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia that is reported to occur infrequently in conjunction with other arrhythmias. Although pharmacologic and surgical therapies are available, there is limited information with regard to catheter ablation of sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia. METHODS: Ten patients with sustained sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia underwent electrophysiologic study and radiofrequency current ablation. Patients were followed up for 9.2 +/- 6.0 months. RESULTS: Of 343 consecutive patients referred for electrophysiologic evaluation of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia, 11 (3.2%) were found to have inducible sustained sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia. Nine of the 11 patients had other associated arrhythmias, including atrioventricular (AV) node reentrant tachycardia (6 patients), AV reciprocating tachycardia (2 patients), ectopic atrial tachycardia (2 patients) and bundle branch reentrant tachycardia (1 patient). In 10 patients, direct ablation of sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia was attempted and was successful in all (confidence interval for failure 0-0.26). Sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia was eliminated with a median of four radiofrequency current applications (range 1 to 10) at 20 to 30 W. Successful ablation site characteristics during sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia included 1) atrial activation > or = 35 ms (mean 44 +/- 8 ms) before the onset of the surface P wave, 2) atrial activation > or = 20 ms (mean 28 +/- 6 ms) before the onset of high right atrial activation, and 3) significantly prolonged and fractionated electrograms (mean duration 87 +/- 21 ms). No complications were encountered, and there have been no recurrences of sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia. CONCLUSIONS: Sinoatrial node reentrant tachycardia may be effectively and safely treated with radiofrequency current ablation at the site of earliest atrial activation.

Radiofrequency catheter ablation of idiopathic recurrent ventricular tachycardia with right bundle branch block, left axis morphology.

Idiopathic ventricular tachycardia with right bundle branch block and left axis deviation morphology is a well described clinical syndrome. Previous studies have mapped the tachycardia focus to the inferior septal region at the base of the posterior papillary muscle of the left ventricle. We describe two typical cases in a 20-year-old man and 29-year-old woman in which the tachycardia focus was localized with endocardial mapping techniques. In both cases the ventricular tachycardia focus was ablated with application of radiofrequency current at the inferior septal region. There were no complications of the procedures. The patients remain asymptomatic over follow-up of 7 and 4 months, respectively.