Percutaneous extraction of stented device leads

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.

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Shock after Stenting Across the Device Leads

A 45-year-old man with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and end-stage renal disease had lived uneventfully with a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) for 5 years. Less than a month before presenting at our institution, he had undergone stenting of his partially occluded subclavian vein, to relieve stenosis of the ipsilateral arteriovenous fistula that was used for his hemodialysis. The CRT-D subsequently discharged. Device interrogation revealed that electrical noise originating from leads damaged by the stent had caused the inappropriate shock and intermittent electrical discharges thereafter. The patient was highly traumatized by these events and insisted upon device removal, which deprived him of a potentially life-saving intervention. He later had a cardiac arrest that resulted in sustained profound hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy with minimal neurologic recovery: his family placed him in a long-term care facility on ventilator support, with a tracheostomy and feeding tube. This situation might have been avoided through collaboration between the interventional radiologist and the electrophysiologist. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a patient with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and end-stage renal disease who presented with inappropriate defibrillator discharge caused by lead damage secondary to stenting across the leads.

Extraction of chronically implanted cardiovascular electronic device leads

OPINION STATEMENT

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) are a remarkable success story. These systems are widely used to prevent symptomatic bradycardia, treat malignant tachyarrhythmia, and to restore a more physiologic contraction to a failing left ventricle. Implantation of a CIED usually involves a lifelong commitment to this therapy, which, unfortunately, is not free from complication requiring removal and/or replacement of all or part of the system. The major obstacle to removal of a CIED is the fibrous attachments that develop between a lead and co-existent leads, veins, and the heart. This process increases over time such that, by one year, removal by traction alone may be problematic and, if aggressive, result in complication. Physicians, surgeons, and engineers have refined techniques of percutaneous lead extraction and developed tools, which have facilitated the process, increased success, and lowered the incidence of complication. Extraction may be performed for a variety of indications some of which are unanimously agreed upon while others remain controversial. Proponents of a broadened application of extraction have proffered the concept of 'lead management,' which includes the removal of all leads that are not clinically relevant to the patient. The benefit of this approach would be to limit the risk of future complication, such as venous occlusion or thromboembolism, and to obviate the increase in difficulty of extraction (due to longer implant duration) that might accompany removal should that be required in the future. Intuitively appealing as this approach might be, there is little evidence supporting it, and the extraordinarily large number of patients currently implanted with recalled ICD leads is indicative of the potential impact this practice may have. This review will discuss extraction, its indications, and outcomes.