Long-term follow-up of abandoned transvenous defibrillator leads: a nationwide cohort study

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.

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.

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 in patients with systemic cardiac device-related infection-Procedural outcome and risk prediction: A GALLERY subgroup analysis

BACKGROUND

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) has evolved as one of the most crucial treatment options for patients with cardiac device-related systemic infection (CDRSI).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to characterize the procedural outcome and risk factors of patients with CDRSI undergoing TLE.

METHODS

A subgroup analysis of patients with CDRSI of the GALLERY (GermAn Laser Lead Extraction RegistrY) database was performed. Predictors for complications, procedural failure, and all-cause mortality were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 722 patients (28.6%) in the GALLERY had "systemic infection" as extraction indication. Patients with CDRSI were older (70.1 ± 12.2 years vs 67.3 ± 14.3 years; P < .001) and had more comorbidities than patients with local infections or noninfectious extraction indications. There were no differences in complete procedural success (90.6% vs 91.7%; P = .328) or major complications (2.5% vs 1.9%; P = .416) but increased procedure-related (1.4% vs 0.3%; P = .003) and all-cause in-hospital mortality (11.1% vs 0.6%; P < .001) for patients with CDRSI. Multivariate analyses revealed lead age ≥10 years as a predictor for procedural complications (odds ratio [OR] 3.23; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-6.60; P = .001). Lead age ≥10 years (OR 2.57; 95% CI 1.03-6.46; P = .04) was also a predictor for procedural failure. We identified left ventricular ejection fraction <30% (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.00-2.99; P = .049), age ≥75 years (OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.27-3.48; P = .004), chronic kidney disease (OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.17-3.14; P = .01), and overall procedural complications (OR 5.15; 95% CI 2.44-10.84; P < .001) as predictors for all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

Patients with CDRSI undergoing TLE demonstrate an increased rate of all-cause in-hospital, as well as procedure-related mortality, despite having comparable procedural success rates. Given these data, it seems paramount to develop preventive strategies to detect and treat CDRSI in its earliest stages.

Lead Abandonment and Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (S-ICD) Implantation in a Cohort of Patients With ICD Lead Malfunction

Background: When an implantable-cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) lead becomes non-functional, a recommendation currently exists for either lead abandonment or removal. Lead abandonment and subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) implantation may represent an additional option for patients who do not require pacing. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of a strategy of lead abandonment and S-ICD implantation in the setting of lead malfunction.

Methods: We analyzed all consecutive patients who underwent S-ICD implantation after abandonment of malfunctioning leads and compared their outcomes with those of patients who underwent extraction and subsequent reimplantation of a single-chamber transvenous ICD (T-ICD).

Results: Forty-three patients underwent S-ICD implantation after abandonment of malfunctioning leads, while 62 patients underwent extraction and subsequent reimplantation of a new T-ICD. The two groups were comparable. In the extraction group, no major complications occurred during extraction, while the procedure failed and an S-ICD was implanted in 4 patients. During a median follow-up of 21 months, 3 major complications or deaths occurred in the S-ICD group and 11 in the T-ICD group (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.29–3.94; P = 0.912). Minor complications were 4 in the S-ICD group and 5 in the T-ICD group (HR 2.13; 95% CI 0.49–9.24; P = 0.238).

Conclusions: In the event of ICD lead malfunction, extraction avoids the potential long-term risks of abandoned leads. Nonetheless the strategy of lead abandonment and S-ICD implantation was feasible and safe, with no significant increase in adverse outcomes, and may represent an option in selected clinical settings. Further studies are needed to fully understand the potential risks of lead abandonment.

Clinical Trial Registration: URL: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02275637