Coronary Sinus Lead Extraction

Clinical Predictors of Incomplete CS Lead Removal during Transvenous Lead Extraction in the Patients with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

BACKGROUND

Reports of coronary sinus (CS) lead removal include small studies with short implant durations. Procedural outcomes for mature CS leads removed with long duration implantation are unavailable.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the safety, efficacy, and clinical predictors for incomplete CS lead removal by Transvenous Lead Extraction (TLE) in a large, long implant duration cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patient cohort.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with CRT devices in the Cleveland Clinic Prospective TLE Registry who had TLE between 2013 and 2022.

RESULTS

CS leads, n=231, implant duration = 6.1±4.0 years, removed from 226 patients were included, employing powered sheaths for 137 leads (59.3%). Complete CS lead success was achieved in 95.2% of leads (n=220) and in 95.6% of patients (n=216). Major complications occurred in 5 patients (2.2%). Patients who had the CS lead extracted 1st had significantly higher incomplete removal rates than when the other leads were 1st removed. Multivariable analysis showed that older CS lead age (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.01-1.82; P = 0.03), and removing the CS lead 1st (OR 7.48, 95% CI 1.02-54.95; P = 0.045) were independent predictors of incomplete CS lead removal.

CONCLUSION

Complete and safe lead removal rate of long implant duration CS leads by TLE was 95%. However, CS lead age and the order that leads were extracted were the independent predictors of incomplete CS lead removal. Therefore, before the CS lead is extracted, physicians should first extract the leads from the other chambers and employ powered sheaths.

Comparison of outcomes in infected cardiovascular implantable electronic devices between complete, partial, and failed lead removal: an ESC-EHRA-EORP ELECTRa (European Lead Extraction ConTrolled) registry

AIMS

The present study sought to determine predictors for success and outcomes of patients who underwent cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) extraction indicated for systemic or local CIED related infection in particular where complete lead removal could not be achieved.

METHODS AND RESULTS

ESC-EORP ELECTRa (European Lead Extraction ConTRolled Registry) is a European prospective lead extraction registry. Out of the total cohort, 1865/3510 (52.5%) patients underwent removal due to CIED related infection. Predictors and outcomes of failure were analysed. Complete removal was achieved in 1743 (93.5%) patients, partial (<4 cm of lead left) in 88 (4.7%), and failed (>4 cm of lead left) in 32 (1.8%) patients. Removal success was unrelated to type of CIED infection (pocket or systemic). Predictors for failure were older leads and older patients [odds ratio (OR) 1.14 (1.08-1.19), P < 0.0001 and OR 2.68 (1.22-5.91), P = 0.0146, respectively]. In analysis by lead, predictors for failure were: pacemaker vs. defibrillator removal and failure to engage the locking stylet all the way to the tip [OR 0.20 (0.04-0.95), P = 0.03 and OR 0.32 (0.13-0.74), P = 0.008, respectively]. Significantly higher complication rates were noted in the failure group (40.6% vs. 15.9 for partial and 8.7% for success groups, P < 0.0001). Failure to remove a lead was a strong predictor for in hospital mortality [hazard ratio of 2.05 (1.01-4.16), P = 0.046].

CONCLUSION

A total of 6.5% of infected CIED patients failed attempted extraction. Only were >4 cm of lead remained resulted in higher procedural complications and mortality rates.

Should His Bundle Pacing Be Preferred over Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Following Atrioventricular Junction Ablation?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are associated with high morbidity and mortality, which is particularly detrimental when patients develop rapid ventricular rates (RVR). Atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation with pacemaker implantation has been used as a method of achieving rate control in patients with incessant AF with RVR. Right ventricular only pacing is known to be harmful in the setting of HF. His bundle pacing (HBP) and biventricular (BiV) pacing both offer durable pacing solutions that offer more physiologic activation. This review describes the benefits and drawbacks of HBP and BiV pacing in HF patients after AVJ ablation.

Explanting Chronic Coronary Sinus Leads

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has become the gold standard for patients with systolic left ventricular function, left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 35%, wide complex QRS, and symptomatic heart failure. Annual implantation volume has steadily increased because of expanding indications for CRT. Improved survival resulted in many of these patients having their CRT devices for many years and eventually requiring an increased number of device-related procedures, including coronary sinus lead revisions and replacements following a coronary sinus lead extraction.