Transvenous lead extraction at the time of cardiac implantable electronic device upgrade: Complexity, safety, and outcomes

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.

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.

Transvenous Lead Extraction during Cardiac Implantable Device Upgrade: Results from the Multicenter Swiss Lead Extraction Registry

BACKGROUND

Device patients may require upgrade interventions from simpler to more complex cardiac implantable electronic devices. Prior to upgrading interventions, clinicians need to balance the risks and benefits of transvenous lead extraction (TLE), additional lead implantation or lead abandonment. However, evidence on procedural outcomes of TLE at the time of device upgrade is scarce.

METHODS

This is a post hoc analysis of the investigator-initiated multicenter Swiss TLE registry. The objectives were to assess patient and procedural factors influencing TLE outcomes at the time of device upgrades.

RESULTS

941 patients were included, whereof 83 (8.8%) had TLE due to a device upgrade. Rotational mechanical sheaths were more often used in upgraded patients (59% vs. 42.7%, p = 0.015) and total median procedure time was longer in these patients (160 min vs. 105 min, p < 0.001). Clinical success rates of upgraded patients compared to those who received TLE due to other reasons were not different (97.6% vs. 93.0%, p = 0.569). Moreover, multivariable analysis showed that upgrade procedures were not associated with a greater risk for complications (HR 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.14-1.57, p = 0.224; intraprocedural complication rate of upgraded patients 7.2% vs. 5.5%). Intraprocedural complications of upgraded patients were mostly associated with the implantation and not the extraction procedure (67% vs. 33% of complications).

CONCLUSIONS

TLE during device upgrade is effective and does not attribute a disproportionate risk to the upgrade procedure.

Incomplete Lead Removal During the Extraction Procedure: Predisposing Factors and Impact on Long-Term Survival in Infectious and Non-Infectious Cases: Analysis of 3741 Procedures

BACKGROUND

The long-term significance of lead remnants (LR) following transvenous lead extraction (TLE) remains disputable, especially in infectious patients.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 3741 TLEs focused on the relationship between LR and procedure complexity, complications and long-term survival.

RESULTS

The study group consisted of 156 individuals with LR (4.17%), and the control group consisted of 3585 patients with completely removed lead(s). In a multivariable model, a younger patient age at CIED implantation, more CIED procedures and procedure complexity were independent risk factors for retention of non-removable LR. Although patients with LR showed better survival outcomes following TLE (log rank p = 0.041 for non-infectious group and p = 0.017 for infectious group), multivariable Cox regression analysis did not confirm the prognostic significance of LR either in non-infectious [HR = 0.777; p = 0.262], infectious [HR = 0.983; p = 0.934] or the entire group of patients [HR = 0.858; p = 0.321].

CONCLUSIONS

1. Non-removable LRs are encountered in 4.17% of patients. 2. CIED infection has no influence on retention of LRs, but younger patient age, multiple CIED-related procedures and higher levels of procedure complexity are independent risk factors for the presence of LR. 3. Better survival outcomes following TLE in patients with LRs are not the effects of their presence but younger patient and better health status.

Unexpected Procedure Difficulties Increasing the Complexity of Transvenous Lead Extraction: The Single Centre Experience with 3721 Procedures

BACKGROUND

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) should be completed, even when facing difficulties which have yet to be described. The aim was to explore unexpected TLE obstacles (the circumstances of the occurrence and influence on TLE outcome).

METHODS

The retrospective analysis of a single centre database containing 3721 TLEs.

RESULTS

Unexpected procedure difficulties (UPDs) occurred in 18.43% of cases (singles in 12.20% of cases and multiples in 6.26% of cases). These included blockages in the lead venous approach in3.28% of cases, functional lead dislodgement in 0.91% of cases, and loss of broken lead fragment in 0.60% of cases. All of them, including implant vein-in 7.98% of cases, lead fracture during extraction-in 3.84% of cases, and lead-to-lead adherence-in 6.59% of cases, Byrd dilator collapse-in 3.41% of cases, including the use of an alternative prolonged the procedure but had no influence on long-term mortality. Most of the occurrences were associated with lead dwell time, younger patient age, lead burden, and poorer procedure effectiveness and complications (common cause). However, some of the problems seemed to be related to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation and the subsequent lead management strategy. A more complete list of all tips and tricks is still required.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) The complexity of the lead extraction procedure combines both prolonged procedure duration and the occurrence of lesser-known UPDs. (2) UPDs are present in nearly one fifth of the TLE procedures, and can occur simultaneously. (3) UPDs, which usually force the extractor to expand the range of techniques and tools, should become part of the training in transvenous lead extraction.

Efficacy and safety of the extraction of cardiostimulation leads using a mechanical dissection tool. A single center experience

BACKGROUND

The percutaneous extraction of endovascular cardiostimulation and defibrillation leads is the most frequent technique nowadays. The tools used today must guarantee the success of the procedure, with the minimum of complications. Our objective was to analyze the safety and efficacy of lead extraction using the Evolution mechanical dissection tool (Cook Medical, USA).

METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out in a total of 826 consecutive patients from October 2009 to December 2018 who underwent the procedure with the Evolution mechanical dissection tool. Preoperative study included complete blood tests, echocardiogram, and chest X-ray. The procedures were performed in the operating room, under general anesthesia and echocardiographic control.

RESULTS

A total of 1227 leads were extracted with a mean chronicity of 10.3 ± 5.1 years. Clinical success (CS) rate was 99.7%. A total of 16 (1.9%) complications occurred, 2 (0.24%) were major complications and 14 (1.7%) were minor complications. There was no operative mortality. There was no statistically significant relationship between implant chamber and complete efficacy. The complete extraction was achieved in all left ventricular leads, in 762 of 774 (98.45%) of right ventricular lead removal, and in 330 of 334 (98.8%) of right atrial leads (p = .31).

CONCLUSION

In our experience, percutaneous extraction of intravenous leads via the use of the Evolution tool (Cook Medical, USA), is a very effective and safe technique that offers low morbidity and mortality.

Assessment of the impact of organisational model of transvenous lead extraction on the effectiveness and safety of procedure: an observational study

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the impact of the organisational model of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) on effectiveness and safety of procedures.

DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of patient data entered prospectively into a computer database.

SETTING

Data of all patients undergoing TLE in three centres in Poland between 2006 and 2021 were analysed.

PARTICIPANTS

3462 patients including: 985 patients undergoing TLE in a hybrid room (HR), with cardiac surgeon (CS) as co-operator, under general anaesthesia (GA), with arterial line (AL) and with transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) monitoring (group 1), 68 patients-TLE in HR with CS, under GA, without TEE (group 2), 406 patients-TLE in operating theatre (OT) using 'arm-C' X-ray machine with CS under GA and with TEE (group 3), 154 patients-TLE in OT with CS under GA, without TEE (group 4), 113 patients-TLE in OT with anaesthesia team, using the 'arm-C' X-ray machine, without CS (group 5), 122 patients-TLE in electrophysiology lab (EPL), with CS under intravenous analgesia without TEE and AL (group 6), 1614 patients-TLE in EPL, without CS, under intravenous analgesia without TEE and AL (group 7).

KEY OUTCOME MEASURE

Effectiveness and safety of TLE depending on organisational model.

RESULTS

The rate of major complications (MC) was higher in OT/HR than in EPL (2.66% vs 1.38%), but all MCs were treated successfully and there was no MC-related death. The use of TEE during TLE increased probability of complete procedural succemss achieving about 1.5 times (OR=1.482; p<0.034) and were connected with reduction of minor complications occurrence (OR=0.751; p=0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

The most important condition to avoid death due to MC is close co-operation with cardiac surgery team, which permits for urgent rescue cardiac surgery. Continuous TEE monitoring plays predominant role in immediate decision on rescue sternotomy and improves the effectiveness of procedure.

Rotational mechanical dilator sheaths for effective transvenous lead extraction

Background

An exponential rise in clinical demand for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy is observed all over the world due to the rapidly expanding lifespan. Accordingly, appropriate lead management including lead extraction is becoming increasingly essential components for the comprehensive care of patients with various CIEDs.

Main body

With a high success rate and a low complication rate, transvenous lead extraction (TLE) has now been established as first-line therapy for lead extraction. However, TLE is often challenging when there are heavily calcified fibrous adhesions between leads and cardiovascular structures. Recently, rotational mechanical dilator (RMD) sheaths were introduced to resolve this issue and facilitate TLE procedure. There are two types of commercially available RMD sheaths, Evolution® systems and TightRail™. Thorough knowledge of the proper use of the RMD devices is essential to increase success rate and to reduce complications of TLE. In the present review, mechanical features, various techniques, and clinical data of RMD sheaths will be described.

Conclusion

According to recent advancement of device technology, the clinical outcomes of TLE using the RMD sheaths are continuously improving. However, as the RMD sheath is a potentially aggressive tool, special care should be taken when used in patients with longer lead ages.

New Insights in Central Venous Disorders. The Role of Transvenous Lead Extractions

Over the last decades, the implementation of new technology in cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators as well as the increasing life expectancy have been associated with a higher incidence of transvenous lead complications over time. Variable degrees of venous stenosis at the level of the subclavian vein, the innominate trunk and the superior vena cava are reported in up to 50% of implanted patients. Importantly, the number of implanted leads seems to be the main risk factor for such complications. Extraction of abandoned or dysfunctional leads is a potential solution to overcome venous stenosis in case of device upgrades requiring additional leads, but also, in addition to venous angioplasty and stenting, to reduce symptoms related to the venous stenosis itself, i.e., the superior vena cava syndrome. This review explores the role of transvenous lead extraction procedures as therapeutical option in case of central venous disorders related to transvenous cardiac leads. We also describe the different extraction techniques available and other clinical indications for lead extractions such as lead infections. Finally, we discuss the alternative therapeutic options for cardiac stimulation or defibrillation in case of chronic venous occlusions that preclude the implant of conventional transvenous cardiac devices.

Transvenous Lead Extraction without Procedure-Related Deaths in 1000 Consecutive Patients: A Single-Center Experience

Background

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is now a first-line technique for the treatment of complications related to cardiac implantable electronic devices. The aim of the study was to demonstrate that it is possible to safely perform difficult TLE procedures with a maximum reduction of peri-procedural major complications.

Methods

A total of 1000 consecutive patients undergoing TLE in a single high-volume center from 2016 to 2019 were studied. All procedures were performed in a hybrid room or operating room by a specialized TLE team. TLE was performed under general anesthesia and monitored by transesophageal echocardiography, and the operating room was suitably equipped for immediate surgical intervention. The effectiveness and safety of the procedures were assessed, with particular emphasis on major complications.

Results

In all, 1952 leads with the mean implant duration of 111.7 ± 77.6 months had been extracted. Complete procedural success of patients was achieved in 95.9% and clinical success in 99.1%. Major complications, predominantly cardiac tamponade (63.3%), occurred in 22 patients (2.2%). Rapid diagnosis and immediate intervention were the key to a 100% survival in patients with this complication.

Conclusion

Performing procedures in a hybrid operating room under general anesthesia in the presence of a cardiac surgeon and with the use of transesophageal echocardiography significantly improves the safety of transvenous lead extraction.

Transvenous lead extraction in 1000 patients guided by intraprocedural risk stratification without surgical backup

BACKGROUND

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) carries a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. Reliable preprocedural risk predictors to guide resource allocation and optimize procedural safety are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate an intraprocedural approach to risk stratification during elective TLE procedures.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent elective TLE of a pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead for noninfectious indications. The risk of TLE is judged intraprocedurally only after an attempt is made to extract the target lead as long as high-risk extraction techniques are avoided. TLE was performed in a well-equipped electrophysiology laboratory with rescue strategies in place but in the absence of surgical staff.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1000 patients were included in this analysis (527 female (52.7%); mean age 61.5 ± 10.2 years). TLE was attempted for 1362 leads, with a mean lead dwell time of 73 ± 43 months (median 70 months; interquartile range 12-180 months). TLE was successful in 914 patients, partially successful in 10, and failed in 76 patients. A laser sheath was required for extraction of 926 leads (68%). Only 1 patient developed intraprocedural cardiac tamponade requiring emergency pericardiocentesis. None of the patients developed hemothorax or required surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

At experienced centers, intraprocedural risk stratification for TLE that avoids high-risk extraction techniques achieved successful TLE in the majority of patients and can potentially help optimize the balance between efficacy, safety, and efficiency in lead extraction.

Comparative Analysis of Procedural Outcomes and Complications Between De Novo and Upgraded Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

OBJECTIVES

This study compared rates of procedural success and complications between de novo cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation versus upgrade, including characterization of technical challenges.

BACKGROUND

CRT upgrade is common, but data are limited on the incidence of procedural success and complications as compared to de novo implantation.

METHODS

All patients who underwent a transvenous CRT procedure at a single institution between 2013 and 2018 were reviewed for procedure outcome, 90-day complications, reasons for unsuccessful left ventricular lead delivery, and the presence of venous occlusive disease (VOD) that required a modified implantation technique.

RESULTS

Among 1,496 patients, 947 (63%) underwent de novo implantation and 549 (37%) underwent device upgrade. Patients who received a device upgrade were older (70 ± 12 years vs. 68 ± 13 years; p < 0.01), with a male predominance (75% vs. 66%; p < 0.01) and greater prevalence of comorbidities. There was no difference in the rate of procedural success between de novo and upgrade CRT procedures (97% vs. 96%; p = 0.28) or 90-day complications (5.1% vs. 4.6%; p = 0.70). VOD was present in 23% of patients who received a device upgrade and was more common among patients with a dual-chamber versus a single-chamber device (26% vs. 9%; p < 0.001). Patients with and without VOD had a similar composite outcome of procedural failure or complication (8.0% vs. 7.8%; p = 1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of procedural success and complications were no different between de novo CRT implantations and upgrades. VOD frequently increased procedural complexity in upgrades, but alternative management strategies resulted in similar outcomes. Routine venography before CRT upgrade may aid in procedural planning and execution of these strategies.

Echocardiographic findings in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices-analysis of factors predisposing to lead-associated changes

BACKGROUND

The constant interaction between intracardiac leads and the heart and veins results in excessive accumulation of fibrous connective tissue around the leads. The extent of this pathological phenomenon, which is visible on transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), and predisposing factors are not well defined.

METHODS

We examined 936 transesophageal echocardiograms prior to transvenous lead extraction (TLE) performed at a high-volume centre between 2015 and 2019.

RESULTS

The most important echocardiographic findings were fibrous binding sites between leads and cardiovascular structures, lead-to-lead adhesions, excessive lead loops, lead-dependent tricuspid dysfunction (LDTD), asymptomatic masses on endocardial leads (AMEL) and vegetations. Fibrotic reaction within the walls of the heart and veins correlated with the presence of lead loops (OR = 1.771; p < .01) and lead dwell time (OR = 1.111; p < .001). Women were more likely to have excessive lead loops (OR = 1.639; p < .01), and the occurrence of loops increase with the number of implanted leads (OR = 2.557; p < .001). Heart failure (OR = 4.016; p < .001), lead looping (OR = 2.603; p < .01) and longer cumulative lead dwell time (OR = 1.017; p < .05) increased the likelihood of LDTD. A variety of AMEL were identified in this study, most commonly in patients with older leads (OR = 1.043; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Lead dwell time is the main factor predisposing to the occurrence of most lead-associated phenomena visualized by TEE in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED). Excessive looping of the lead is an important cause of fibrous binding sites and LDTD. AMEL are frequently detected in CIED patients, and their various forms concurrent with vegetations could represent an evolutionary stage of lead-associated masses.

Transesophageal Echocardiography As a Monitoring Tool During Transvenous Lead Extraction-Does It Improve Procedure Effectiveness?

Background: Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is a valuable tool for monitoring the patient during transvenous lead extraction (TLE), but the direct impact of TEE on the effectiveness and safety of TLE has not yet been documented. Methods: The effectiveness of TLE and short-term survival were compared between two groups of patients: 2106 patients in whom TEE was performed before and after TLE and 1079 individuals in whom continuous TEE monitoring was used. The procedure-related risk of major complications was assessed using a predictive SAFeTY TLE score. Results: The patients monitored by TEE were characterized by older age, more comorbidities and higher SAFeTY TLE scores (6.143 ± 4.395 vs. 5.593 ± 4.127; p = 0.004). Complete procedural success was significantly higher in the TEE-guided group (97.683% vs. 95.442%, p < 0.01). The rate of serious complications in the TEE-guided group was lower than the predictive SAFeTY TLE score—a reduction of 28.75% (p < 0.05). Periprocedural mortality in the TEE-guided and non-TEE-guided groups was zero vs. six deaths (p = 0.186). Short-term survival was comparable between the groups. Conclusions: Transesophageal echocardiography as a monitoring tool during transvenous lead extraction provides valuable results—higher rates of complete procedural success and a reduced risk of the most severe complications, thus preventing periprocedural deaths.

Transvenous Lead Extraction SAFeTY Score for Risk Stratification and Proper Patient Selection for Removal Procedures Using Mechanical Tools

Background: To ensure the safety and efficacy of the increasing number of transvenous lead extractions (TLEs), it is necessary to adequately assess the procedure-related risk. Methods: We analyzed potential clinical and procedural risk factors associated with 2049 TLE procedures. The TLEs were performed between 2006 and 2016 using only simple tools for lead extraction. Logistic regression analysis was used to develop a risk prediction scoring system for TLEs. Results: Multivariate analysis showed that the sum of lead dwell times, anemia, female gender, the number of procedures preceding TLE, and removal of leads implanted in patients under the age of 30 had a significant influence on the occurrence of major complications during a TLE. This information served as a basis for developing a predictive SAFeTY TLE score, where: S = sum of lead dwell times, A = anemia, Fe = female, T = treatment (previous procedures), Y = young patients, and TLE = transvenous lead extraction. In order to facilitate the use of the SAFeTY TLE Score, a simple calculator was constructed. Conclusion: The SAFeTY TLE score is easy to calculate and predicts the potential occurrence of procedure-related major complications. High-risk patients (scoring more than 10 on the SAFeTY TLE scale) must be treated at high-volume centers with surgical backup.

Reimplantation After Lead Removal

The number of implanted cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has increased significantly in the last 30 years, which has led to an upsurge in CIED complications, such as infection and lead malfunction requiring CIED extraction. The decision-making process of CIED reimplantation requires meticulous planning that includes careful consideration of several aspects: the reason for extraction, the indication for CIED reimplantation, patients' wishes, timing of reimplantation, the need for a bridging device, and the type and location of device to be reimplanted. In this article, the authors review this decision-making process and the necessary steps to achieve optimal patient outcomes.

Exploring the patients’ experiences of living with a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Background:

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator provides effective treatment for the prevention of sudden cardiac arrest but significant risks associated with transvenous implantation persist. The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator has proven to be an alternative and innovative treatment option for select patients to mitigate these risks. Obtaining the patients’ perspectives can provide clinicians with essential information to guide implant selection, procedural decision-making, and support patient management. Conventional implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients have reported shock-related anxiety, fear, insufficient education, and challenges adapting to physical and psychological changes. Little evidence exists to determine whether differences between the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator and conventional implantable cardioverter defibrillator allow for the transferability of our current knowledge to the care and management of this population.

Aims:

The purpose of this study was to explore patients’ experiences of living with a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator including the decision-making process, implant, and follow-up care processes.

Methods:

Using an exploratory qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone with 15 participants who underwent subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator implant.

Results:

Analysis revealed five main themes: (a) influences on decision-making; (b) unmet education needs; (c) physical impact; (d) psychological impact; and (e) recommendations.

Conclusion:

As a new technology, little knowledge of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator exists outside of the tertiary implanting sites, therefore developing new strategies to increase learning and dissemination is essential. Although similarities exist in our findings to those of conventional implantable cardioverter defibrillators, there are significant differences in the decision-making process and physical impact which require individualized care planning and development of strategies to provide a patient-centered approach to care.