2017 HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:e503-e551. [PMID: 28919379 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.09.001]

Tricuspid valve disease and cardiac implantable electronic devices

The role of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-related tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is increasingly recognized as an independent clinical entity. Hence, interventional TR treatment options continuously evolve, surgical risk assessment and peri-operative care improve the management of CIED-related TR, and the role of lead extraction is of high interest. Furthermore, novel surgical and interventional tricuspid valve treatment options are increasingly applied to patients suffering from TR associated with or related to CIEDs. This multidisciplinary review article developed with electrophysiologists, interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, and cardiac surgeons aims to give an overview of the mechanisms of disease, diagnostics, and proposes treatment algorithms of patients suffering from TR associated with CIED lead(s) or leadless pacemakers.

VDD Lead Extraction-Differences with Other Leads and Practical Tips in Management

Background: VDD (atrial sensing, ventricular sensing/pacing) leads are relatively rarely implanted; therefore, experience in their extraction is very limited. We aimed to investigate whether VDD lead removal may be a risk factor for the increased complexity of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) or major complications. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 3808 TLE procedures (including 103 patients with VDD leads). Results: If TLE included VDD lead removal, procedure duration (lead dilation time) was prolonged, complicated extractions were slightly more common, and more advanced tools were required. This is partly due to longer implant duration (in patients with VDD systems-135.2 months; systems without VDD leads-109.3 months; p < 0.001), more frequent presence of abandoned leads (all systems containing VDD leads-22.33% and all systems without VDD leads-10.77%), and partly to the younger age of patients with VDD leads (51.74 vs. 57.72 years; p < 0.001, in the remaining patients) at the time of system implantation. VDD lead extraction does not increase the risk of major complications (1.94 vs. 2.34%; p = 0.905). Conclusions: The extraction of VDD leads may be considered a risk factor for increased procedure complexity, but not for major complications. However, this is not a direct result of VDD lead extraction but specific characteristics of the patients with VDD leads. Operator skill and team experience combined with special custom maneuvers can enable favorable results to be achieved despite the specific design of VDD leads, even with older VDD lead models.

Campylobacter coli enteritis associated with Campylobacter fetus bacteremia, spondylodiscitis, and late CIED-related endocarditis, a case report

Campylobacter sp. is widely considered a leading causative agent of bacterial food-borne gastrointestinal illness. Discitis and endocarditis caused by Campylobacter spp. are extremely rare. We describe the case of a 94-year-old man who was admitted for recent lumbar pain, diarrhea, and fever. C. fetus and C. coli were identified by MALDI-TOF from blood and stool samples respectively. MRI of the spine showed L5-S1 discitis. Patient was treated with 6 weeks of amoxicillin with clinical and microbiological response until cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) related endocarditis occurred four weeks after the end of the antibiotic treatment. He was treated with another 6 weeks amoxicillin regimen, with a favorable outcome after a 6-month follow-up. Enteric infection with Campylobacter spp. in a debilitated patient should raise the possibility of a co-infection with another more invasive species such as C. fetus, leading to systemic invasion. In case of Campylobacter fetus bacteremia, a search for endocarditis and spondylodiscitis is recommended even in the absence of specific clinical signs.

Joint British Society consensus recommendations for magnetic resonance imaging for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is increasingly a fundamental component of the diagnostic pathway across a range of conditions. Historically, the presence of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) has been a contraindication for MRI, however, development of MR Conditional devices that can be scanned under strict protocols has facilitated the provision of MRI for patients. Additionally, there is growing safety data to support MR scanning in patients with CIEDs that do not have MR safety labelling or with MR Conditional CIEDs where certain conditions are not met, where the clinical justification is robust. This means that almost all patients with cardiac devices should now have the same access to MRI scanning in the National Health Service as the general population. Provision of MRI to patients with CIED, however, remains limited in the UK, with only half of units accepting scan requests even for patients with MR Conditional CIEDs. Service delivery requires specialist equipment and robust protocols to ensure patient safety and facilitate workflows, meanwhile demanding collaboration between healthcare professionals across many disciplines. This document provides consensus recommendations from across the relevant stakeholder professional bodies and patient groups to encourage provision of safe MRI for patients with CIEDs.

Infection remediation after septic device extractions: analysis of three treatment strategies including a 1-year follow-up

Introduction

In CIED infections, all device material needs to be removed. But, especially in pacemaker-dependent patients it is often not possible to realize a device-free interval for infection remediation. In those patients, different treatment options are available, however the ideal solution needs still to be defined.

Methods

This retrospective analysis includes 190 patients undergoing CIED extractions due to infection. Three different treatment algorithms were analyzed: Group 1 included 89 patients with system removal only (System removal group). In Group 2, 28 patients received an epicardial electrode during extraction procedure (Epicardial lead group) while 78 patients in group 3 (contralateral reimplantation group) received implantation of a new system contralaterally during extraction procedure. We analyzed peri- and postoperative data as well as 1-year outcomes of the three groups.

Results

Patients in the system removal and epicardial lead groups were significantly older, had more comorbidities, and suffered more frequently from systemic infections than those in contralateral reimplantation group. Lead extraction procedures had comparable success rates: 95.5%, 96.4%, and 93.2% of complete lead removal in the System removal, Epicardial Lead, Contralateral re-implantation group respectively. Device reimplantation was performed in all patients in Epicardial lead and Contralateral reimplantation group, whereas only 49.4% in System removal group received device re-implantation. At 1-year follow-up, freedom from infection and absence of pocket irritation were comparable for all groups (94.7% Contralateral reimplantation group and Epicardial lead group, 100% System removal group). No procedure-related mortality was observed, whereas 1-year mortality was 3.4% in System removal group, 4.1% in Contralateral re-implantation group and 21.4% in Epicardial lead group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with CIED infection, systems should be removed completely and reimplanted after infection remediation. In pacemaker-dependent patients, simultaneous contralateral CIED re-implantation or epicardial lead placement may be performed, depending on route, severity and location of infection.

Update on Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infections and Their Prevention, Diagnosis, and Management: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association: Endorsed by the International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases

The American Heart Association sponsored the first iteration of a scientific statement that addressed all aspects of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection in 2010. Major advances in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of these infections have occurred since then, necessitating a scientific statement update. An 11-member writing group was identified and included recognized experts in cardiology and infectious diseases, with a career focus on cardiovascular infections. The group initially met in October 2022 to develop a scientific statement that was drafted with front-line clinicians in mind and focused on providing updated clinical information to enhance outcomes of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection. The current scientific statement highlights recent advances in prevention, diagnosis, and management, and how they may be incorporated in the complex care of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection.

The Role of the 18F-FDG PET/CT in the Management of Patients Suspected of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices' Infection

Background: Infection of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDI) is a real public health problem. The main aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of CIEDI. Methods: A total of 48 patients, who performed 18F-FDG PET/CT for the clinical suspicion of CIEDI were retrospectively analyzed; all patients were provided with a model with procedural recommendations before the exam. Sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy (DA) of 18F-FDG PET/CT were calculated; the reproducibility of qualitative analysis was assessed with Cohen's κ test. The semi-quantitative parameters (SUVmax, SQR and TBR) were evaluated in CIEDI+ and CIEDI- patients using the Student' t-test; ROC curves were elaborated to detect cut-off values. The trend of image quality with regards to procedural recommendation adherence was evaluated. Results: Se, Sp, PPV, NPV and DA were respectively 96.2%, 81.8%, 86.2%, 94.7% and 89.6%. The reproducibility of qualitative analysis was excellent (K = 0.89). Semiquantitative parameters resulted statistically different in CIEDI+ and CIEDI- patients. Cut-off values were SUVmax = 2.625, SQR = 3.766 and TBR = 1.29. Trend curves showed increasing image quality due to adherence to procedural recommendations. Conclusions:18F-FDG-PET/CT is a valid tool in the management of patients suspected of CIEDI and adherence to procedural recommendations improves its image quality.

Transvenous lead extraction of lumenless 3830 pacing lead in conduction system pacing: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

The Medtronic SelectSecure Model 3830 lumenless lead (Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, MN) is commonly used for conduction system pacing (CSP). However, with this increased use, the potential need for transvenous lead extraction (TLE) also will increase. While extraction of endocardial 3830 leads is rather well described especially in pediatric and adult congenital heart disease population, there is very limited data on extraction of CSP leads. In the present study, we reported our preliminary experience on TLE of CSP leads and provided technical considerations.

METHODS

The study population comprised 6 consecutive patients (67% male; mean age 70 ± 22 years) with CSP leads (3830 leads), including left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) lead (n = 3) and His pacing lead (n = 3) undergoing TLE. Overall target leads were 17. The mean implant duration time of CSP leads was 97 ± 90 months [range 8-193).

RESULTS

Manual traction was successful in 2 cases and mechanical extraction tools were required in the remaining cases. Sixteen leads (94%) were completely extracted, whereas incomplete removal was observed in one lead (6%) among 1 patient. Of note, in the only lead incompletely removed, we observed retention of < 1-cm remnant of lead material consisting of the screw of 3830 LBBP lead into the interventricular septum. No failure of lead extraction was reported and no major complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrated that at an experienced center the success of TLE of chronically implanted CSP leads is high in the absence of major complications also when mechanical extraction tools are needed.

Relevance of cardiac imaging in the evolving landscape of infective endocarditis management

Infective endocarditis (IE) is an increasingly recognized condition with high morbidity. Patients with atypical symptoms, culture-negative infections, and prosthetic cardiac devices and implants represent challenging populations to evaluate and manage. Recent major society guidelines have recommended the appropriate incorporation of multimodality imaging in the evaluation of these more complex IE cases. This article draws on the available literature regarding the different cardiac imaging modalities and discusses the role of multimodality imaging in IE.

Three-dimensional Transesophageal Echocardiography in Infective Endocarditis: What Does It Add?

Infective endocarditis (IE) diagnosis is based on a clinical suspicion supported by consistent microbiological and instrumental data. Evidence of involvement of cardiac valves (native or prosthetic) or prosthetic intracardiac material is a major diagnostic criterion of IE. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the initial technique of choice for the diagnosis while transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is recommended in patients with an inconclusive or negative TTE, in patients with high suspicion of IE, as well as in patients with a positive TTE, in order to document local complications. Repeating TTE and/or TEE should be considered during follow-up of uncomplicated IE, in order to detect new silent complications and monitor vegetation size. In the setting of IE, the role of three-dimensional (3D) TEE is increasing; in fact, this technique has also been shown to be useful for the diagnosis of IE and its complications as it allows to obtain infinite planes and volumetric reconstructions. In this review, we will describe the usefulness of 3D-TEE and its added value in the management of IE.

Multimodality Imaging Diagnosis in Infective Endocarditis

Imaging is an important tool in the diagnosis and management of infective endocarditis (IE). Echocardiography is an essential examination, especially in native valve endocarditis (NVE), but its diagnostic accuracy is reduced in prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE). The diagnostic ability is superior for transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE), but a negative test cannot exclude PVE. Both transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and TEE can provide normal or inconclusive findings in up to 30% of cases, especially in patients with prosthetic devices. New advanced non-invasive imaging tests are increasingly used in the diagnosis of IE. Nuclear medicine imaging techniques have demonstrated their superiority over TEE for the diagnosis of PVE and cardiac implantable electronic device infective endocarditis (CIED-IE). Cardiac computed tomography angiography imaging is useful in PVE cases with inconclusive TTE and TEE investigations and for the evaluation of paravalvular complications. In the present review, imaging tools are described with their values and limitations for improving diagnosis in NVE, PVE and CIED-IE. Current knowledge about multimodality imaging approaches in IE and imaging methods to assess the local and distant complications of IE is also reviewed. Furthermore, a potential diagnostic work-up for different clinical scenarios is described. However, further studies are essential for refining diagnostic and management approaches in infective endocarditis, addressing limitations and optimizing advanced imaging techniques across different clinical scenarios.

Success and safety of deep sedation as a primary anaesthetic approach for transvenous lead extraction: a retrospective analysis

There is a rising number in complications associated with more cardiac electrical devices implanted (CIED). Infection and lead dysfunction are reasons to perform transvenous lead extraction. An ideal anaesthetic approach has not been described yet. Most centres use general anaesthesia, but there is a lack in studies looking into deep sedation (DS) as an anaesthetic approach. We report our retrospective experience for a large number of procedures performed with deep sedation as a primary approach. Extraction procedures performed between 2011 and 2018 in our electrophysiology laboratory have been included retrospectively. We began by applying a bolus injection of piritramide followed by midazolam as primary medication and would add etomidate if necessary. For extraction of leads a stepwise approach with careful traction, locking stylets, dilator sheaths, mechanical rotating sheaths and if needed snares and baskets has been used. A total of 780 leads in 463 patients (age 69.9 ± 12.3, 31.3% female) were extracted. Deep sedation was successful in 97.8% of patients. Piritramide was used as the main analgesic medication (98.5%) and midazolam as the main sedative (94.2%). Additional etomidate was administered in 15.1% of cases. In 2.2% of patients a conversion to general anaesthesia was required as adequate level of DS was not achieved before starting the procedure. Sedation related complications occurred in 1.1% (n = 5) of patients without sequalae. Deep sedation with piritramide, midazolam and if needed additional etomidate is a safe and feasible strategy for transvenous lead extraction.

Balloon venoplasty for disdialysis syndrome due to pacemaker-related superior vena cava syndrome with chylothorax post-bacteraemia: A case report

BACKGROUND

Although superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome has also been reported as a late complication of pacemaker (PM) implantation, acute onset of SVC syndrome caused by disdialysis syndrome in patients with PM implantation is very rare. There are no specific therapies or guidelines.

CASE SUMMARY

A 96-year-old woman receiving dialysis was implanted with a PM due to sick sinus syndrome. She was referred to our facility for chest discomfort experienced during dialysis. Upon examination, unilateral pleural effusion on the right side was cloudy with a foul odour. The patient was diagnosed with pyothorax and treated with antibiotics. After the effusion was reduced, it gradually reaggravated and remained cloudy. In this case, SVC syndrome, which is generally considered a late complication after PM implantation, rapidly developed following the bacteraemia, resulting in impaired venous return, chylothorax, and disdialysis syndrome. After catheter intervention for SVC stenosis, the patient's symptoms promptly improved. The patient has been recurrence-free for a year.

CONCLUSION

Acute SVC syndrome can cause dysdialysis in PM-implanted patients. Catheter intervention alone has improved this condition for a traceable period.

Incidence and Prognostic Implications of Cardiac-Implantable Device-Associated Tricuspid Regurgitation: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression Analysis

New-onset or worsening tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a well-established complication encountered after cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). However, there are limited and conflicting data on the true incidence and prognostic implications of this complication. This study aimed to bridge this current gap in the literature. Electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched from inception to March 2023, for studies reporting the incidence and/or prognosis of CIED-associated new or worsening TR. Potentially eligible studies were screened and selected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A random effect model meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis were performed, and I-squared statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. A total of 52 eligible studies, with 130,759 patients were included in the final quantitative analysis with a mean follow-up period of 25.5 months. The mean age across included studies was 69.35 years, and women constituted 46.6% of the study population. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 50.15%. The incidence of CIED-associated TR was 24% (95% confidence interval [CI] 20% to 28%, p <0.001) with an odds ratio of 2.44 (95% CI 1.58 to 3.77, p <0.001). CIED-associated TR was independently associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.52, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.69, p <0.001), heart failure (HF) hospitalizations (aHR 1.82, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.78, p = 0.006), and the composite of mortality and HF hospitalizations (aHR 1.96, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.87, p = 0.001) in the follow-up period. In conclusion, CIED-associated TR occurred in nearly one-fourth of patients after device implantation and was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalizations.

Stepwise Approach for Transvenous Lead Extraction in a Large Single Centre Cohort

BACKGROUND

Infection, lead dysfunction and system upgrades are all reasons that transvenous lead extraction is being performed more frequently. Many centres focus on a single method for lead extraction, which can lead to either lower success rates or higher rates of major complications. We report our experience with a systematic approach from a less invasive to a more invasive strategy without the use of laser sheaths.

METHODS

Consecutive extraction procedures performed over a period of seven years in our electrophysiology laboratory were included. We performed a stepwise approach with careful traction, lead locking stylets (LLD), mechanical non-powered dilator sheaths, mechanical powered sheaths and, if needed, femoral snares.

RESULTS

In 463 patients (age 69.9 ± 12.3, 31.3% female) a total of 780 leads (244 ICD leads) with a mean lead dwelling time of 5.4 ± 4.9 years were identified for extraction. Success rates for simple traction, LLD, mechanical non-powered sheaths and mechanical powered sheaths were 31.5%, 42.7%, 84.1% and 92.6%, respectively. A snare was used for 40 cases (as the primary approach for 38 as the lead structure was not intact and stepwise approach was not feasible) and was successful for 36 leads (90.0% success rate). Total success rate was 93.1%, clinical success rate was 94.1%. Rate for procedural failure was 1.1%. Success for less invasive steps and overall success for extraction was associated with shorter lead dwelling time (p < 0.001). Major procedure associated complications occurred in two patients (0.4%), including one death (0.2%). A total of 36 minor procedure-associated complications occurred in 30 patients (6.5%). Pocket hematoma correlated significantly with uninterrupted dual antiplatelet therapy (p = 0.001). Pericardial effusion without need for intervention was associated with long lead dwelling time (p = 0.01) and uninterrupted acetylsalicylic acid (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

A stepwise approach with a progressive invasive strategy is effective and safe for transvenous lead extraction.

LECOM (Lead Extraction COMplexity): A New Scoring System for Predicting a Difficult Procedure

(1) Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) can become far more complex when unanticipated difficulties arise. The aim was to develop a simple scoring system that allows for the prediction of the difficulty and complexity of this significant procedure. (2) Methods: Based on analysis of 3741 TLE procedures with and without complicating factors (extended fluoroscopy time, need for second-line instruments, and advanced techniques and instruments), a five-point Complex Indicator of Difficulty of (TLE) Procedure (CID-TLEP) scale was developed. Two or more points on the CID-TLEP scale indicate a higher level of procedure complexity. (3) Results: Patient age below 51 years at first CIED implantation, number of abandoned leads, number of previous procedures, passive fixation and multiple leads to be extracted, and a ratio of dwell time of oldest lead to patient age during TLE of >0.13 are significant predictors of higher levels of lead extraction complexity. The ROC analysis demonstrates that a point total (being the sum of the odds ratios of the above variables) of >9.697 indicates a 21.83% higher probability of complex TLE (sensitivity 74.08%, specificity 74.46%). Finally, a logistic function was calculated, and we constructed a simple equation for lead extraction complexity that can predict the probability of a difficult procedure. The risk of complex extraction (as a percentage) is calculated as [1/(1 + 55.34 · 0.754X)] · 100 (p < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: The LECOM score can effectively predict the risk of a difficult transvenous lead extraction procedure, and predicting the probability of a more complex procedure may help clinicians in planning lead removal and improving patient management.

Extraction outcomes of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads vary by manufacturer and model family

AIMS

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads is considered challenging. The structure of each ICD leads is variable between manufacturer and model families. The net impact of lead family on the safety and effectiveness of TLE is poorly characterized. We assessed the safety and efficacy of ICD TLE and the impact of manufacturer ICD model family on the outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study cohort included all consecutive patients with ICD who underwent TLE between 2013 and 2022 and are enrolled in the Cleveland Clinic Prospective TLE Registry. A total of 885 ICD leads (median implant duration 8 years) in 810 patients were included. Complete ICD TLE success was achieved in 97.2% of the leads (n = 860) and in 98.0% of the patients (n = 794). Major complications occurred in 22 patients (2.7%). Complete procedural success rate varied by manufacturer and lead family; Medtronic 98.9%, Abbott 95.9%, Boston Scientific 95.0%, Biotronik 91.2%, P = 0.03, and Linox family leads had the lowest, 89.7% P = 0.02. Multivariable predictors of incomplete ICD lead removal included ICD lead age > 10 years and Linox family lead. Multivariable predictors of major complications included ICD lead age > 15 years and longer lead extraction time, and predictors of all-cause mortality within 30 days included lead extraction for infection, end-stage renal disease, and higher New York Heart Association functional class.

CONCLUSION

Complete and safe ICD lead removal rate by TLE is extremely high but varied by manufacturer and lead family. Linox family lead and >10 years lead age were independent predictors of incomplete lead removal.

Long-term outcomes of abandoned leads of cardiac implantable electronic devices

BACKGROUND

Evidence of the long-term outcomes of abandoned leads (ALs) in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes of ALs.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study reviewed a single-center CIED registry of 2962 procedures performed from 1984-2018 and identified 130 patients with AL (AL group). We matched 2 controls without AL (by age, sex, device type, and device revision/removal date) to each patient with AL (n = 260) and compared CIED-related infection, venous thrombosis/stenosis, and all-cause mortality between groups using a Cox proportional hazard model analysis.

RESULTS

For a mean follow-up period of 11.2 ± 8.2 years, 14 (3.6%), 7 (1.8%), and 143 (36.7%) patients had a CIED-related infection, venous thrombosis/stenosis, or experienced all-cause mortality, respectively. The AL group had more comorbidities than the control group. Lead malfunction was the most common cause of abandonment (64.6%). After adjustment for covariates, no significant intergroup differences were noted in the risks of infection, venous thrombosis/stenosis, or all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-8.25; aHR 1.18; 95% CI 0.25-5.64; aHR 1.26; 95% CI 0.89-1.80, respectively). Patients with multiple ALs had increased risks of infection and all-cause mortality vs controls (aHR 8.61; 95% CI 2.13-34.84; aHR 2.42; 95% CI 1.17-5.00, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Patients with a single AL showed similar risks of CIED-related infections, venous thrombosis/stenosis, and all-cause mortality as those without ALs, whereas those with multiple ALs showed increased risks of infection and all-cause mortality.

Scoping review of percutaneous mechanical aspiration for valvular and cardiac implantable electronic device infective endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous mechanical aspiration (PMA) of intravascular vegetations is a novel strategy for management of patients with infective endocarditis (IE) who are at high risk of poor outcomes with conventional cardiac surgery. However, clear indications for its use as well as patient outcomes are largely unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a scoping review of the literature to summarize patient characteristics and outcomes of those undergoing PMA for management of IE.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full text for inclusion and independently extracted data.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies published until February 21, 2023, describing the use of PMA for management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) or valvular IE were included.

ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS

As this was a scoping review, risk of bias assessment was not performed.

METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

Descriptive data was reported.

RESULTS

We identified 2252 titles, of which 1442 abstracts were screened, and 125 full text articles were reviewed for inclusion. Fifty-one studies, describing a total of 294 patients who underwent PMA for IE were included in our review. Over 50% (152/294) of patients underwent PMA to debulk cardiac implantable electronic device lead vegetations prior to extraction (152/294), and 38.8% (114/294) of patients had a history of drug use. Patient outcomes were inconsistently reported, but few had procedural complications, and all-cause in-hospital mortality was 6.5% (19/294).

CONCLUSIONS

While PMA is a promising advance in the care of patients with IE, higher quality data regarding patient outcomes are needed to better inform the use of this procedure.

Associated factors and outcomes of crossover from a laser sheath to a bidirectional rotational mechanical sheath during transvenous lead extraction

Background

During transvenous lead extraction (TLE), a GlideLight laser sheath (Philips) cannot always be advanced over the lead, and crossover to the Evolution system (i.e., an Evolution RL sheath or Evolution Shortie RL sheath [Cook Medical]) is required. We aimed to determine the associated factors and outcomes of such device crossover.

Methods

This observational study included 112 patients who underwent TLE. The patients were divided into crossover and non-crossover groups. Outcomes and associated factors of crossover were evaluated.

Results

Overall, 57 (50.9%) patients required crossover to the Evolution system (crossover group), whereas 55 (49.1%) patients did not require crossover (non-crossover group). Clinical success rate was similar between the two groups (98.3% vs. 100%; p = 1.00). No major intraprocedural complications related to powered sheaths occurred. Multivariate logistic regression analysis results showed that dwell time of the oldest extracted lead (per year) (odds ratio [OR]: 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.36; p = .026), number of leads extracted per procedure (OR: 7.23, 95% CI: 1.74-29.99; p = .007), and use of a femoral approach (OR: 21.09, 95% CI: 2.33-190.67; p = .007) were associated factors of crossover. The cutoff for crossover was 7.7 years from the implant (sensitivity 90.5%, specificity 64.9%, area under the curve 0.80).

Conclusions

Both groups showed a high rate of clinical success. Switching to the Evolution system may facilitate a safe and effective TLE when a laser sheath does not advance despite laser activation.

[Lead extraction in cardiac implantable electronic devices]

Lead extraction due to infection or lead dysfunction has become more important in recent years. Patients with high risk of severe and life-threatening complications should only undergo surgery in experienced centers where appropriate personnel and equipment are available. In this review, different techniques and methods to safely and successfully perform transvenous lead extraction are summarized.

Lead Extraction and Mortality Among Patients With Cardiac Implanted Electronic Device Infection

Importance

Complete hardware removal is a class I recommendation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection, but practice patterns and outcomes remain unknown.

Objective

To quantify the number of Medicare patients with CIED infections who underwent implantation from 2006 to 2019 and lead extraction from 2007 to 2019 to analyze the outcomes in these patients in a nationwide clinical practice cohort.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included fee-for-service Medicare Part D beneficiaries from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2019, who had a de novo CIED implantation and a CIED infection more than 1 year after implantation. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2019.

Exposure

A CIED infection, defined as (1) endocarditis or infection of a device implant and (2) documented antibiotic therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes of interest were device infection, device extraction, and all-cause mortality. Time-varying multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate the association between extraction and survival.

Results

Among 1 065 549 patients (median age, 78.0 years [IQR, 72.0-84.0 years]; 50.9% male), mean (SD) follow-up was 4.6 (2.9) years after implantation. There were 11 304 patients (1.1%) with CIED infection (median age, 75.0 years [IQR, 67.0-82.0 years]); 60.1% were male, and 7724 (68.3%) had diabetes. A total of 2102 patients with CIED infection (18.6%) underwent extraction within 30 days of diagnosis. Infection occurred a mean (SD) of 3.7 (2.4) years after implantation, and 1-year survival was 68.3%. There was evidence of highly selective treatment, as most patients did not have extraction within 30 days of diagnosed infection (9202 [81.4%]), while 1511 (13.4%) had extraction within 6 days of diagnosis and 591 (5.2%) had extraction between days 7 and 30. Any extraction was associated with lower mortality compared with no extraction (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.74-0.90; P < .001). Extraction within 6 days was associated with even lower risk of mortality (AHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.61-0.78; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, a minority of patients with CIED infection underwent extraction. Extraction was associated with a lower risk of death compared with no extraction. The findings suggest a need to improve adherence to guideline-directed care among patients with CIED infection.

Impact of fixation mechanism and helix retraction status on right ventricular lead extraction

Background

The impact of lead fixation mechanism on extractability is poorly characterized.

Objective

We aimed to compare the technical difficulty of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) of active vs passive fixation right ventricular (RV) leads.

Methods

A total of 408 patients who underwent RV TLE by a single expert electrophysiologist at Oregon Health & Science University between October 2011 and June 2022 were identified and retrospectively analyzed; 331 (81%) had active fixation RV leads and 77 (19%) had passive fixation RV leads. The active fixation cohort was further stratified into those with successfully retracted helices (n = 181) and failed helix retraction (n = 109). A numerical system (0-9) devised using 6 procedural criteria quantified a technical extraction score (TES) for each RV TLE. The TES was compared between groups.

Results

Helix retraction was successful in ≥55% of active fixation TLEs. The mean TES for active-helix retracted, active-helix non-retracted, and passive fixation groups was 1.8, 3.5, and 3.7, respectively. The TES of the active-helix retracted group was significantly lower than those of the active-helix non-retracted group (adjusted P < .01) and the passive fixation group (adjusted P < .01). There was no significant difference in TES between the passive fixation and active-helix non-retracted groups in multivariate analysis (P = .18). The TLE success rate of the entire cohort was >97%, with a major complication rate of 0.5%.

Conclusion

TLE of active fixation leads where helical retraction is achieved presents fewer technical challenges than does passive fixation RV lead extraction; however, if the helix cannot be retracted, active and passive TLE procedures present similar technical challenges.

Safety of same-day discharge after lead extraction procedures

BACKGROUND

Same-day discharge (SDD) after cardiovascular procedures is rapidly gaining ground.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the safety of SDD after transvenous lead extraction (TLE).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent elective TLE between January 2020 and October 2021 at our institution. The primary outcome was SDD, and major procedural complications and readmissions within 30 days of the procedure were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

In this analysis of 111 patients who underwent elective TLE, 80 patients (72%) were discharged on the same day (SDD group) while 31 patients (28%) stayed overnight (overnight group). Lead malfunction was the most common indication for TLE in both groups. Patients in the overnight group were more likely to have a lead dwell time of ≤10 years than those in the SDD group (38.7% vs 20% of all leads in each group; P = .042), have laser sheaths used for extraction and a higher number of leads extracted. No major complications were reported in both groups. In a multivariate analysis, lower body mass index and the use of laser sheath during TLE were predictors of overnight stay. Patients who underwent a procedure using advanced extraction techniques were 3.5 times more likely to stay overnight (95% confidence interval 1.27-9.78; P = .016).

CONCLUSION

In appropriately selected patients undergoing elective lead extraction, SDD is feasible and safe. Higher body mass index, fewer extracted leads, shorter lead dwell times (<10 years), and less frequent use of laser-powered extraction sheaths were associated with an increased likelihood of SDD.

Current Device Needs for Patients with Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease

Pediatric electrophysiologists believe that there is a paucity of pediatric-specific cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) available for their patients. Specific patient characteristics such as vascular size, intracardiac anatomy, and expected somatic growth limit the types of CIED implants possible for pediatric and congenital heart disease (CHD) patients. These patients demonstrate higher CIED-related complication rates compared with adults. As the number of pediatric and CHD patients who require CIEDs increases, so does the need for advocacy. Fortunately, collaboration among the Food and Drug Administration, industry, and pediatric societies has led to the improvement of regulations and support for clinical trials.

Simultaneous subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and leadless pacemaker implantation for patients at high risk of infection: a retrospective case series report

BACKGROUND

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) and leadless pacemaker (LP) are alternative options for patients at high risk of infection requiring ICD and pacing therapy. In this analysis, we described the simultaneous implantation of S-ICD and LP in patients with high infectious risk.

METHODS

The study cohort comprised patients referred to our institution for ICD implantation due to high-risk factors of infection.

RESULTS

Between 2018 and 2022, 13 patients were referred, including 11 with infected ICD and 2 for first ICD implantation in the presence of high-risk factors. In cases of infected ICD, successful extraction was performed using a mechanical dilatation technique. Reimplantation was delayed until resolution of infection with antibiotic therapy. The devices were implanted during a single procedure, with S-ICD implantation following LP placement for verification of sensing adequacy through surface ECG screening. Suitable vectors for sensing during inhibited and ventricular pacing were identified in all patients. Defibrillation testing was effective, and no issues with double counting or undersensing were observed. The postoperative period was uneventful, and during a median follow-up of 35 months, no complications or infections were reported. The median ventricular pacing percentage was 5%, and a single inappropriate shock episode due to myopotential interference was reported and resolved by reprogramming the sensing vector.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous implantation of S-ICD and LP is feasible and safe in patients at high risk of infection requiring both ICD and pacing therapy. This combined approach provides an effective solution for these patients.

Safety and success of transvenous lead extraction using excimer laser sheaths: a meta-analysis of over 1700 patients

AIMS

While numerous studies have demonstrated favourable safety and efficacy of the excimer laser sheath for transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in smaller cohorts, comprehensive large-scale investigations with contemporary data remain scarce. This study aims to evaluate the safety and performance of laser-assisted TLE through a meta-analysis of contemporary data.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify articles that assessed the safety and performance of the spectranetics laser sheath (SLS) II and GlideLight Excimer laser sheaths in TLE procedures between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2021. Safety outcomes included procedure-related death and major/minor complications. Performance outcomes included procedural and clinical success rates. A random-effects, inverse-variance-weighting meta-analysis was performed to obtain the weighted average of the evaluated outcomes. In total, 17 articles were identified and evaluated, including 1729 patients with 2887 leads. Each patient, on average, had 2.3 ± 0.3 leads with a dwell time of 7.9 ± 3.0 years. The TLE procedural successes rate was 96.8% [1440/1505; 95% CI: (94.9-98.2%)] per patient and 96.3% [1447/1501; 95% CI: (94.8-97.4%)] per lead, and the clinical success rate per patient was 98.3% [989/1010, 95% CI: (97.4-99.0%)]. The procedure-related death rate was 0.08% [7/1729, 95% CI: (0.00%, 0.34%)], with major and minor complication rates of 1.9% [41/1729; 95% CI: (1.2-2.8%)] and 1.9% [58/1729; 95% CI: (0.8-3.6%)], respectively.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that excimer laser sheath-assisted TLE has high success and low procedural mortality rates. It provides clinicians with a reliable and valuable resource for extracting indwelling cardiac leads which require advanced extraction techniques.

Transvenous lead extraction: Experience of the Tandem approach

AIMS

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is important in the management of cardiac implantable electronic devices but carries risk. It is most commonly completed from the superior access, often with 'bail-out' support via the femoral approach. Superior and inferior access may be used in tandem, which has been proposed as an advance in safety and efficacy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Tandem approach.

METHOD

The 'Tandem' procedure entailed grasping of the targeted lead in the right atrium to provide countertraction as a rotational dissecting sheath was advanced over the lead from the subclavian access. Consecutive 'Tandem' procedures performed by a single operator between December 2020 and March 2023 in a single large-volume TLE centre were included and compared with the conventional superior approach (control) using 1:1 propensity score matching; patients were statistically matched for demographics.

RESULTS

The Tandem in comparison with the conventional approach extracted leads of much greater dwell time (148.9 ± 79 vs. 108.6 ± 77 months, P < 0.01) in a shorter procedure duration (96 ± 36 vs. 127 ± 67 min, P < 0.01) but requiring more fluoroscopy (16.4 ± 10.9 vs. 10.8 ± 14.9 min, P < 0.01). The Tandem and control groups had similar clinical (100% vs. 94.7%, P = 0.07) and complete (94.8% vs. 92.8%, P = 0.42) success, with comparable minor (4% vs. 6.7%, P = 0.72) and major (0% vs. 4%, P = 0.25) complications; procedural (0% vs. 1.3%, P = 1) and 30-day (1.3% vs. 4%, P = 0.62) mortality were also similar.

CONCLUSION

The Tandem procedure is as safe and effective as the conventional TLE. It can be applied to leads of a long dwell time with a potentially shorter procedure duration.

Lead management in patients undergoing percutaneous tricuspid valve replacement or repair: a 'heart team' approach

Clinically significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has historically been managed with either medical therapy or surgical interventions. More recently, percutaneous trans-catheter tricuspid valve (TV) replacement and tricuspid trans-catheter edge-to-edge repair have emerged as alternative treatment modalities. Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) have an increased incidence of TR. Severe TR in this population can occur for multiple reasons but most often results from the interactions between the CIED lead and the TV apparatus. Management decisions in patients with CIED leads and clinically significant TR, who are undergoing evaluation for a percutaneous TV intervention, need careful consideration as a trans-venous lead extraction (TLE) may both worsen and improve TR severity. Furthermore, given the potential risks of 'jailing' a CIED lead at the time of a percutaneous TV intervention (lead fracture and risk of subsequent infections), consideration should be given to performing a TLE prior to a percutaneous TV intervention. The purpose of this 'state-of-the-art' review is to provide an overview of the causes of TR in patients with CIEDs, discuss the available therapeutic options for patients with TR and CIED leads, and advocate for including a lead management specialist as a member of the 'heart team' when making treatment decisions in patients TR and CIED leads.

Practical Considerations for Cardiac Electronic Devices Reimplantation Following Transvenous Lead Extraction Due to Related Endocarditis

Despite progress in implantation technology and prophylactic measures, infection complications related to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are still a major concern with negative impacts on patient outcomes and the health system's resources. Infective endocarditis (IE) represents one of the most threatening CIED-related infections associated with high mortality rates and requires prompt diagnosis and management. Transvenous lead extraction (TLE), combined with prolonged antibiotic therapy, has been validated as an effective approach to treat patients with CIED-related IE. Though early complete removal is undoubtedly recommended for CIED-related IE or systemic infection, device reimplantation still represents a clinical challenge in these patients at high risk of reinfection, with many gaps in the current knowledge and international guidelines. Based on the available literature data and authors' experience, this review aims to address the practical and clinical considerations regarding CIED reimplantation following lead extraction for related IE, focusing on the reassessment of CIED indication, procedure timing, and the reimplanted CIED type and site. A tailored, multidisciplinary approach involving clinical cardiologists, electrophysiologists, cardiac imaging experts, cardiac surgeons, and infectious disease specialists is crucial to optimize these patients' management and clinical outcomes.

Comparison of non-laser and laser transvenous lead extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is performed using non-laser and laser techniques with overall high efficacy and safety. Variation in outcomes between the two approaches does exist with limited comparative evidence in the literature. We sought to compare non-laser and laser TLE in a meta-analysis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and CENTRAL databases for TLE studies published between 1991 and 2021. From the included 68 studies, safety and efficacy data were carefully evaluated and extracted. Aggregated cases of outcomes were used to calculate odds ratio (OR), and pooled rates were synthesized from eligible studies to compare non-laser and laser techniques. Subgroup comparison of rotational tool and laser extraction was also performed. Non-laser in comparison with laser had lower procedural mortality (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.1%, P < 0.01), major complications (pooled rate 0.7% vs. 1.7%, P < 0.01), and superior vena cava (SVC) injury (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.5%, P < 0.001), with higher complete success (pooled rate 96.5% vs. 93.8%, P < 0.01). Non-laser comparatively to laser was more likely to achieve clinical [OR 2.16 (1.77-2.63), P < 0.01] and complete [OR 1.87 (1.69-2.08), P < 0.01] success, with a lower procedural mortality risk [OR 1.6 (1.02-2.5), P < 0.05]. In the subgroup analysis, rotational tool compared with laser achieved greater complete success (pooled rate 97.4% vs. 95%, P < 0.01) with lower SVC injury (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.7%, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Non-laser TLE is associated with a better safety and efficacy profile when compared with laser methods. There is a greater risk of SVC injury associated with laser sheath extraction.

Transvenous lead extraction, factors affecting procedural difficulty

BACKGROUND

A complex transvenous lead extraction (TLE) procedure could be associated with lower success and higher complication rates in inexperienced hands. In this study, we aim to assess the factors that determine procedural difficulty in TLE.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 200 consecutive patients undergoing TLE in a single referral centre from June 2020 to December 2021. Lead extraction difficulty was assessed by the success of simple manual traction with or without a locking stylet, the need for advanced extraction tools and the number of tools required to extract the lead. Logistic and linear regression analyses were used to determine the factors independently affecting these 3 parameters.

RESULTS

363 leads were extracted from 200 patients (79% males, mean age 66.85 years). The indication for TLE was device-related infection in 51.5%. Multivariate analysis revealed the lead indwelling time to be the only factor affecting the 3 parameters of difficulty. Passive fixation leads and dual coil leads increased procedural difficulty by affecting 2 parameters each. Factors that affected one parameter included infected leads, coronary sinus leads, older age of the patient and a history of valvular heart disease, all associated with a simpler procedure. Right ventricular leads were associated with a more complex one.

CONCLUSION

The most important factor that increased TLE procedural difficulty was a longer lead indwelling time, followed by passive fixation and dual-coil leads. Other contributing factors were the presence of infection, coronary sinus leads, older patients, a history of valvular heart disease and right ventricular leads.

Transvenous versus subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators in young cardiac arrest survivors

Secondary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are indicated in young patients presenting with aborted sudden cardiac death (SCD) because of ventricular arrhythmias. Transvenous-ICDs (TV-ICDs) are effective, established therapies supported by evidence. The significant morbidity associated with transvenous leads led to the development of the newer subcutaneous-ICD (S-ICD). This review discusses the clinical considerations when selecting an ICD for the young patient presenting with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The major benefits of TV-ICDs are their ability to pace (antitachycardia pacing [ATP], bradycardia support and cardiac resynchronisation therapy [CRT]) and the robust evidence base supporting their use. Other benefits include a longer battery life. Significant complications associated with transvenous leads include pneumothorax and tamponade during insertion and infection and lead failure in the long term. Comparatively, S-ICDs, by virtue of having no intravascular leads, prevent these complications. S-ICDs have been associated with a higher incidence of inappropriate shocks. Patients with an indication for bradycardia pacing, CRT or ATP (documented ventricular tachycardia) are seen as unsuitable for a S-ICD. If venous access is unsuitable or undesirable, S-ICDs should be considered given the patient is appropriately screened. There is a need for further randomised controlled trials to directly compare the two devices. TV-ICDs are an effective therapy for preventing SCD limited by significant lead-related complications. S-ICDs are an important development hindered largely by an inability to pace. Young patients stand to gain the most from a S-ICD as the cumulative risk of lead-related complications is high. A clinical framework to aid decision-making is presented.

Ghost in the right atrium: A case report on successful identification of residual fibrous tissue

The term "ghost" refers to residual fibrous tissue that remains within the cardiovascular system following the removal of implanted device leads. In this case, a 75-year-old male underwent a transvenous lead extraction procedure prompted by an infection. After the procedure, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) revealed a stable "ghost" in the right atrium. Figures and videos dynamically depicted the ghost's morphology, clearly showing that one end of this spectral entity was firmly attached to the atrial wall, while the other end displayed unrestrained mobility within the bloodstream. After undergoing a thorough evaluation that confirmed the benign nature of the "ghost", there was evidently no need for medical intervention. In summary, the article portrayed a rare yet intriguing "ghost" observed during the perioperative period. Furthermore, this study emphasizes the crucial significance of accurately distinguishing between these "ghosts" and genuinely pathological structures. Such differentiation holds immense importance in preventing unnecessary medical interventions.

Factors associated with uptake of guideline-recommended cardiovascular implantable electronic device management: a nationwide, retrospective cohort study

Clinical guidelines recommend device removal for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection management. In this retrospective, nationwide cohort, 60.8% of CIED infections received guideline-concordant care. One-year mortality was higher among those without procedural management (25% vs 16%). Factors associated with receipt of device procedures included pocket infections and positive microbiology.

Use of a taurolidine containing antimicrobial wash to reduce cardiac implantable electronic device infection

AIMS

TauroPace (Tauropharm, Bavaria Germany), a taurolidine solution for combating cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection, was compared with a historical control of 3% hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) in a prospective observational study.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The device pocket was irrigated, and all hardware accessible within (leads, suture sleeves, pulse generator) was wiped with H2O2, TauroPace, or taurolidine in a galenic formulation during any invasive CIED procedure at the study centre. Only CIED procedures covered by TauroPace or H2O2 from 1 January 2017 to 28 February 2022 were included for analysis. Patients who underwent >1 procedure were censored for the last treatment group and reassigned at the next procedure. The primary endpoint was major CIED infection within 3 months. The secondary endpoints were CIED infection beyond 3 months, adverse events potentially related to the antimicrobial solutions, CIED system, procedure, and death, till the end of follow-up. TauroPace covered 654 procedures on 631 patients, and H2O2 covered 551 procedures on 532 patients. The TauroPace group had more patient risk factors for infection than the H2O2 group (P = 0.0058) but similar device and procedure-specific risk factors (P = 0.17). Cardiac implantable electronic device infection occurred in 0/654 (0%) of the TauroPace group and 6/551 (1.1%) of the H2O2 group (P = 0.0075). Death occurred in 23/654 (3.5%) of the TauroPace group and 14/551 (2.5%) of the H2O2 group (P = 0.33). Non-infection related adverse events were rarer in the TauroPace (3.8%) than the H2O2 (6.0%) group (P = 0.0802).

CONCLUSION

TauroPace is safe but more effective than H2O2 in reducing CIED infection.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05576194.

Retrieval of Chronically Implanted Dual-chamber Leadless Pacemakers in an Ovine Model

BACKGROUND

The clinical utilization of leadless pacemakers (LPs) as an alternative to traditional transvenous pacemakers is likely to increase with the advent of dual-chamber LP systems. Since device retrieval to allow LP upgrade or replacement will become an important capability, the first such dual-chamber, helix-fixation LP system (Aveir DR; Abbott, Abbott Park, IL) was specifically designed to allow catheter-based retrieval. In this study, the preclinical performance and safety of retrieving chronically implanted dual-chamber LPs was evaluated.

METHODS

Atrial and ventricular LPs were implanted in the right atrial appendage and right ventricular apex of 9 healthy ovine subjects. After ≈2 years, the LPs were retrieved using a dedicated transvenous retrieval catheter (Aveir Retrieval Catheter; Abbott) by snaring, docking, and unscrewing from the myocardium. Comprehensive necropsy/histopathology studies were conducted to evaluate device- and procedure-related outcomes.

RESULTS

At a median of 1.9 years postimplant (range, 1.8-2.6), all 18 of 18 (100%) LPs were retrieved from 9 ovine subjects without complications. The median retrieval procedure duration for both LPs, from first-catheter-in to last-catheter-out, was 13.3 minutes (range, 2.5-36.4). Postretrieval, all right atrial, and right ventricular implant sites demonstrated minimal tissue disruption, with intact fibrous tissue limited to the distal device body. No significant device-related trauma, perforation, pericardial effusion, right heart or tricuspid valve injury, or chronic pulmonary thromboembolism were observed at necropsy.

CONCLUSIONS

This preclinical study demonstrated the safe and effective retrieval of chronically implanted, helix-fixation, dual-chamber LP systems, paving the way for clinical studies of LP retrieval.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

A Systematic Review of Short-Term Outcomes of Leadless Pacemaker Implantation After Transvenous Lead Removal of Infected Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device

The outcomes of leadless pacemaker (LP) implantation after transvenous lead removal (TLR) of infected cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are not well-established. This study sought to describe the outcomes of LP implantation after TLR of infected CIED. We conducted a literature search using PubMed and Embase for a combination of terms including LP implantation, transvenous lead extraction, TLR, transvenous lead explant, infected CIED, infected pacemaker, and infected implantable cardioverter defibrillator. The inclusion criterion was LP implantation after TLR of infected CIED. The exclusion criterion was TLR for noninfectious reasons. Study end points included procedural complications and LP infection during follow-up. Of 132 publications reviewed, 13 studies with a total of 253 patients (74 ± 14 years of age, 174 [69%] males) were included. The most common indication of the initial device implantations was a high-degree atrioventricular block (n = 100 of 253, 39.5%). Of the 253 patients included, 105 patients (41.5%) underwent concomitant LP implantation during the TLR procedure, and 36 patients (14.2%) had temporary transvenous pacing as a bridge from TLR to LP implantation. Of the 148 patients with data on the type of CIED infection, 56.8% had systemic CIED infection and 43.2% had isolated pocket infection. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common causative organism in 33% of the reported patients. The LP was implanted an average of 5.4 ± 10.7 days after TLR of infected CIED. During the LP implantation, 1 patient (0.4%) had unsuccessful implantation because of an intraprocedural complication requiring sternotomy. After LP implantation, 2 patients (0.8%) developed groin hematoma, 2 patients (0.8%) developed femoral arteriovenous fistula, and 1 patient (0.4%) developed pericardial effusion requiring pericardiocentesis. During a mean follow-up of 11.3 ± 10.6 months, 3 patients (1.2%) developed pacemaker syndrome, 1 patient (0.4%) developed acute on chronic heart failure exacerbation, and only 1 patient (0.4%) developed LP-related infection requiring LP retrieval. This study suggests that LP implant is feasible and safe after removal of infected CIED with cumulative adverse events at 4% and a reinfection rate of 0.4%. Large prospective studies are needed to better evaluate the best timing of LP implantation after TLR of an infected CIED.

Transvenous lead extraction in children with bidirectional rotational dissection sheaths

Objectives

Due to the limited longevity of endovascular leads, children require thoughtful lifetime lead management strategies including conservation of access vessel patency. Consequently, there is an increasing interest in transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in children, however, data on TLE and the use of powered mechanical dissection sheaths is limited.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study analyzing all children <18 years that underwent TLE in our institution from 2015 to 2022. Procedural complexity, results and complications were defined as recommended by recent consensus statements.

Results

Twenty-eight children [median age 12.8 (interquartile range 11.3-14.6) years] were included. Forty-one leads were extracted [median dwell time 85 (interquartile range 52-102) months]. Extractions of 31 leads (76%) in 22 patients (79%) were complex, requiring advanced extraction tools including powered bidirectional rotational dissection sheaths in 14 children. There were no major complications. Complete procedural success was achieved in 18 (64%) and clinical success in 27 patients (96%), respectively. Procedural success and complexity varied between lead types. The Medtronic SelectSecure™ lead was associated with increased odds of extraction by simple traction (p = 0.006) and complete procedural success (p < 0.001) while the Boston Scientific Fineline™ II lead family had increased odds of partial procedural failure (p = 0.017).

Conclusions

TLE with the use of mechanical powered rotational dissection sheaths is feasible and safe in pediatric patients. In light of rare complications and excellent overall clinical success, TLE should be considered an important cornerstone in lifetime lead management in children. Particular lead types might be more challenging and less successful to extract.

Procedural outcome & risk prediction in young patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction-a GALLERY subgroup analysis

Background

The prevalence of young patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is steadily increasing, accompanied by a rise in the occurrence of complications related to CIEDs. Consequently, transvenous lead extraction (TLE) has become a crucial treatment approach for such individuals.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to examine the characteristics and procedural outcomes of young patients who undergo TLE, with a specific focus on identifying independent risk factors associated with adverse events.

Methods

All patients in the GALLERY (GermAn Laser Lead Extraction RegistrY) were categorized into two groups based on their age at the time of enrollment: 45 years or younger, and over 45 years. A subgroup analysis was conducted specifically for the younger population. In this analysis, predictor variables for all-cause mortality, procedural complications, and procedural failure were evaluated using multivariable analyses.

Results

We identified 160 patients aged 45 years or younger with a mean age of 35.3 ± 7.6 years and 42.5% (n = 68) female patients. Leading extraction indication was lead dysfunction in 51.3% of cases, followed by local infections in 20.6% and systemic infections in 16.9%. The most common device to be extracted were implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) with 52.5%. Mean number of leads per patient was 2.2 ± 1.0. Median age of the oldest indwelling lead was 91.5 [54.75-137.5] months. Overall complication rate was 3.8% with 1.9% minor and 1.9% major complications. Complete procedural success was achieved in 90.6% of cases. Clinical procedural success rate was 98.1%. Procedure-related mortality was 0.0%. The all-cause in-hospital mortality rate was 2.5%, with septic shock identified as the primary cause of mortality. Multivariable analysis revealed CKD (OR: 19.0; 95% CI: 1.84-194.9; p = 0.018) and systemic infection (OR: 12.7; 95% CI: 1.14-142.8; p = 0.039) as independent predictor for all-cause mortality. Lead age ≥ 10 years (OR: 14.58, 95% CI: 1.36-156.2; p = 0.027) was identified as sole independent risk factor for procedural complication.

Conclusion

TLE in young patients is safe and effective with a procedure-related mortality rate of 0.0%. CKD and systemic infection are predictors for all-cause mortality, whereas lead age ≥ 10 years was identified as independent risk factor for procedural complications in young patients undergoing TLE.

Radiographic predictors of failure of simple manual traction of transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Extraction of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads could be a difficult procedure due to fibrous tissue around the lead and anatomical variations. In this report, we present our experience in the radiographic predictors of failure of simple manual traction (SMT) in patients with dual-coil ICD requiring lead extraction (LE).

METHODS

Between January 2017 and February 2021, 103 leads were removed in 65 consecutive patients; 65 (63.1%) were dual-coil ICD leads, 22 (21.4%) were atrial, and 16 (15.5%) were coronary sinus leads. Patient-based and procedural data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Clinical and procedural characteristics were compared and radiographic predictors of failure of SMT of ICD leads were assessed. Projected anteroposterior (AP) lead tortuosity was measured and lead slack score was estimated on chest X-ray (CXR).

RESULTS

Simple manual traction failed in 27 (42%) of the ICD leads. Ottawa slack score (odds ratio [OR] 2.368, 95% CI [1.261-4.447]; P = 0.007), AP lead tortuosity > 1.10 (OR 7.477, 95% CI [1.718-35.542]; P = 0.007), and number of previous interventions (OR 6.016, 95% CI [1.184-30.557]; P < 0.030) were found to be independently related to the failure of SMT. Receiver-operator characteristic curve analysis yielded an AP lead tortuosity cutoff value of > 1.10 for predicting the failure of SMT. The area under the curve was 0.744; the 95% confidence interval (CI) was 0.617 to 0.871 (P = 0.001), with a sensitivity of 63% and a specificity of 73%.

CONCLUSION

Simple manual traction success in our study varied based on radiographic lead-related parameters. Before planning the procedure, increased AP lead tortuosity in vasculature and higher lead slack score can be easily determined on CXR and may be associated with more fibrous adherences, the complexity of the LE, and failure of SMT.

Transvenous Lead Extraction: Outcomes From a Single Centre Providing a National Service for New Zealand

BACKGROUND

With increasing demand for cardiac implantable electronic devices there is a parallel increase in the need for transvenous lead extraction (TLE). Due to its small population, all TLE procedures in New Zealand are currently performed in a single centre, Auckland City Hospital. We analysed the clinical characteristics and outcomes of those undergoing TLE since this service was established.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, single-centre cohort study of all TLE procedures between October 2015 and December 2021. Definitions from the European Lead Extraction Controlled study, Heart Rhythm Society, European Heart Rhythm Association consensus documents were used.

RESULTS

A total of 247 patients had 480 leads extracted, averaging 40 TLE procedures annually. Patients had a median lead dwell time of 6 (interquartile range [IQR] 3-11) years, 60 (13%) of leads had been in-situ >15 years, median age 61 (IQR 48-70) years, 73 (30%) female, 28 (11%) Māori, 23 (9%) Pasifika. Lead dysfunction (115 patients, 47%) and infection (90 patients, 37%) were the most common indications for TLE. Complete clinical and radiological success was achieved for 96% and 95%, respectively. Procedure-related complications occurred in 16 (7%) patients. Major intra-procedure complications occurred in 5 patients (2%), including 2 (1%) deaths. Death within one year of TLE occurred in 13 (26%) with systemic infection, 5 (3%) with local infection, and 5 (3%) with non-infection indications for TLE, p <0.01.

CONCLUSIONS

TLE is associated with high radiographic and clinical success, low complication, and low mortality rate. At our single centre providing a national service, TLE outcomes are comparable with those achieved internationally.

Extraction of non-infected redundant pacing and defibrillator leads does not result in better patient outcomes

The introduction of dedicated tools for pacing and defibrillator lead extraction has resulted in relatively high success and low complication rates. The confidence this elicits has broadened the indications from device infections to non-functional or redundant leads and the latter make up an increasing share of extraction procedures. Proponents of extracting these leads point to the higher complication burden of lead extraction in patients with longstanding abandoned leads when compared one-to-one with extraction when these leads become redundant. However, this does not translate into better patient outcomes on a population level: complications are rare with properly abandoned leads and thus most patients will never be subjected to an extraction procedure and the ensuing complications. Therefore, not extracting redundant leads minimises the risk for the patients and avoids many expensive procedures.