Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Outcomes of repeated transvenous lead extraction.
Fu, Haixia; Ho, Gordon; Yang, Mei; Huang, Xinmiao; Fender, Erin A; Mulpuru, Siva; Asirvatham, Roshini; Pretorius, Victor G; Friedman, Paul A; Birgersdotter-Green, Ulrika; Cha, Yong-Mei.
Afiliação
  • Fu H; Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Henan Provincial People's Hospital, Zhengzhou University, Henan, China.
  • Ho G; Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  • Yang M; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
  • Huang X; Department of Cardiology, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
  • Fender EA; Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  • Mulpuru S; Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
  • Asirvatham R; Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  • Pretorius VG; Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  • Friedman PA; Student Scholar Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  • Birgersdotter-Green U; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
  • Cha YM; Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol ; 41(10): 1321-1328, 2018 10.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30058073
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

The outcomes of repeated cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) lead extraction have not been well studied. We sought to determine the indications, outcomes, and safety of repeated lead extraction procedures.

METHODS:

This retrospective study was conducted using data from two medical centers, including 38 patients who had undergone two or more lead extraction procedures compared to 439 patients who had a single procedure. The electronic medical records and procedural databases were reviewed to determine the indications, procedural characteristics, and outcomes. The outcomes of the first procedure were compared to the outcomes of subsequent procedures.

RESULTS:

The 5-year cumulative probability of a repeated extraction procedure was 11% (95% confidence interval, 7%-15%). In 439 patients who underwent single lead extractions, 72% had device and lead related infections as the procedure indication compared to 39% for 38 patients who underwent repeated extraction (P < 0.001). The mean duration from device reimplant to repeated extraction procedures was 63 ± 48 months. Ninety-eight percent of the leads were removed completely in repeated procedures, similar to the 95% success rate of the first procedure (P = 0.51). There was no significant difference in major complication rate in the first or repeated extractions (2.6% vs 5.2%, P = 0.79).

CONCLUSIONS:

Repeated transvenous lead extraction is not uncommon. It had a high success rate comparable to that of the initial procedure and was not associated with an increased incidence of adverse events.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Marca-Passo Artificial / Desfibriladores Implantáveis / Remoção de Dispositivo / Eletrodos Implantados Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Marca-Passo Artificial / Desfibriladores Implantáveis / Remoção de Dispositivo / Eletrodos Implantados Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article