Pathways for training and accreditation for transvenous lead extraction: a European Heart Rhythm Association position paper

Management of patients with transvalvular right ventricular leads undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions: a scientific statement of the European Heart Rhythm Association and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions of the ESC endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society, the Asian Pacific Heart Rhythm Society and the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society

Up to one-third of patients referred for transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention (TTVI) have a transvalvular pacemaker (PPM) or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead in place. Both the electrophysiology and interventional cardiology communities have been alerted to the complexity of decision-making in this situation due to potential interactions between the leads and the TTVI material, including the risk of jailing or damage to the leads. This document, commissioned by the European Heart Rhythm Association and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions of the ESC, reviews the scientific evidence to inform Heart Team discussions on the management of patients with a PPM or ICD who are scheduled for or have undergone TTVI.

Lead Extraction-Indications, Procedure, and Future Directions

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation has steadily increased in the United States owing to increased life expectancy, better access to health care, and the adoption of updated guidelines. Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is an invasive technique for the removal of CIED devices, and the most common indications include device infections, lead failures, and venous occlusion. Although in-hospital and procedure-related deaths for patients undergoing TLE are low, the long-term mortality remains high with 10-year survival reported close to 50% after TLE. This is likely demonstrative of the increased burden of comorbidities with aging. There are guidelines provided by various professional societies, including the Heart Rhythm Society, regarding indications for lead extraction and management of these patients. In this paper, we will review the indications for CIED extraction, procedural considerations, and management of these patients based upon the latest guidelines.

Efficacy and safety of negative pressure wound therapy in the treatment of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices pocket infection

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) pocket infection, eliminating the need for CIED and leads extraction.

METHODS

The NPWT cohort consisted of 42 patients with CIED infection who were treated with NPWT from 2013 to 2023. Among them, 3 patients had a systemic infection and 1 patient had incomplete data. We performed a case-control study in which the NPWT group was compared with the conservative treatment group (40 patients). Main outcomes included failure rate (CIED/lead extraction during the 1-year follow-up, 30-day mortality/chronic infection, or infection-related mortality/recurrence) and infection-free time, with cure defined as absence of failure criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients with pocket infections were treated with NPWT from 2013 to 2023. NPWT was curative in 78.9% (n = 30 of 38) of patients who remained free of infection [median follow-up 12.63 months, interquartile range (IQR): 12.30-34.10 months]. Compared with patients who were treated conservatively, the two groups demonstrated balanced baseline characteristics. Patients who were treated with NPWT had a significantly higher cure rate (78.9% vs. 55.0%, n = 22 of 40; p = 0.025) and a longer mean infection-free time at the 1-year follow-up (338.00 vs. 285.20 days, p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

NPWT is an effective alternative for patients with CIED pocket infections who are unsuitable or unwilling to undergo CIED and leads extraction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was approved by the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Clinicaltrials.gov number: ChiCTR2300073560) on July 07, 2023.

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.

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.

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.

Cardiologist-Directed Sedation Management in Patients Undergoing Transvenous Lead Extraction: A Single-Centre Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

The demand for transvenous lead extraction (TLE) has increased. In line with this, the safety of such procedures has also increased. Traditionally, TLE is performed under resource-intensive general anaesthesia. This study aims to evaluate the safety and outcomes of Cardiologist-lead deep sedation for TLE.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 328 TLE procedures performed under deep sedation from 2016 to 2019. TLE procedures were performed by experienced electrophysiologists. Sedation was administered by a specifically trained cardiologist (bolus midazolam/fentanyl and propofol infusion). Procedural sedation data including blood pressure, medication administration and sedation time were collected. Complications related to sedation and the operative component of the procedure were analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The sedation-associated complication rate during TLE was 22.0%. The most common complication (75% of complications) was hypotension requiring noradrenaline, followed by bradycardia requiring atropine (13% of complications). Additionally, the unplanned presence of an anaesthesiologist was needed in one case (0.3%). Deep sedation was achieved with midazolam (mean dose 42.9 ± 26.5 µg/kg), fentanyl (mean dose 0.4 ± 0.6 µg/kg) and propofol (mean dose 3.5 ± 1.2 mg/kg/h). There was no difference in medication dosage between those with a sedation-associated complication and those without. Sedation-associated complications appeared significantly more in patients with reduced LVEF (p = 0.01), renal impairment (p = 0.01) and a higher American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) class (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Deep sedation for TLE can be safely performed by a specifically trained cardiologist, with a transition to general anaesthesia required in only 0.3% of cases. We continue to recommend the on-call availability of an anaesthesiologist and cardiac surgeon in case of major complications.

Complicated Pocket Infection in Patients Undergoing Lead Extraction: Characteristics and Outcomes

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection can present with pocket or systemic manifestations, both necessitating complete device removal and pathogen-directed antimicrobial therapy. Here, we aim to characterize those presenting with both pocket and systemic infection. A retrospective analysis of CIED extraction procedures included 300 patients divided into isolated pocket (n = 104, 34.7%), complicated pocket (n = 54, 18%), and systemic infection (n = 142, 47.3%) groups. The systemic and complicated pocket groups frequently presented with leukocytosis and fever > 37.8, as opposed to the isolated pocket group. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common pathogen in the systemic and complicated pocket groups (43.7% and 31.5%, respectively), while Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CONS) predominated (31.7%) in the isolated pocket group (10.6%, p < 0.001). No differences were observed in procedural success or complications rates. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis found that at three years of follow-up, the rate of all-cause mortality was significantly higher among patients with systemic infection compared to both pocket groups (p < 0.001), with the curves diverging at thirty days. In this study, we characterize a new entity of complicated pocket infection. Despite the systemic pattern of infection, their prognosis is similar to isolated pocket infection. We suggest that this special category be presented separately in future publications of CIED infections.

Regional Disparities in Transvenous Lead Extraction for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Japan - A Descriptive Study Using the National Database Open Data

BACKGROUND

Because the penetration of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection has not been investigated in Japan, we conducted a population-based, retrospective, descriptive study to evaluate regional disparities in the use of TLE for CIED infection and the potential undertreatment of CIED infection using a nationwide insurance claims database.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients who underwent CIED implantation or generator exchange and TLE between April 2018 and March 2020 were identified. Moreover, the penetration ratio of TLE for CIED infection in each prefecture was estimated. CIED implantation and TLE were most prevalent in the age categories of 80-89 years (40.3%) and 80-89 years (36.9%), respectively. There was no correlation between the number of CIED implantations and that of TLE (rho=-0.087, 95% confidence interval -0.374 to 0.211, P=0.56). The median penetration ratio was 0.00 (interquartile range 0.00-1.29). Of the 47 prefectures, 6, comprising Okinawa, Miyagi, Okayama, Fukuoka, Tokyo, and Osaka, showed a penetration ratio ≥2.00.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study data indicated great regional disparities in the penetration of TLE and potential undertreatment of CIED infection in Japan. Additional measures are needed to address these issues.

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.

Current Views on Infective Endocarditis: Changing Epidemiology, Improving Diagnostic Tools and Centering the Patient for Up-to-Date Management

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a rare but potentially life-threatening disease, sometimes with longstanding sequels among surviving patients. The population at high risk of IE is represented by patients with underlying structural heart disease and/or intravascular prosthetic material. Taking into account the increasing number of intravascular and intracardiac procedures associated with device implantation, the number of patients at risk is growing too. If bacteremia develops, infected vegetation on the native/prosthetic valve or any intracardiac/intravascular device may occur as the final result of invading microorganisms/host immune system interaction. In the case of IE suspicion, all efforts must be focused on the diagnosis as IE can spread to almost any organ in the body. Unfortunately, the diagnosis of IE might be difficult and require a combination of clinical examination, microbiological assessment and echocardiographic evaluation. There is a need of novel microbiological and imaging techniques, especially in cases of blood culture-negative. In the last few years, the management of IE has changed. A multidisciplinary care team, including experts in infectious diseases, cardiology and cardiac surgery, namely, the Endocarditis Team, is highly recommended by the current guidelines.

Transvenous lead extractions in a single high-volume center over 24 years: High success rate and low complication rate

Background

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) procedures can be complicated and are associated with a small but significant risk of cardiovascular complications. However, methods and tools vary among centers.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to the present the methods and results of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator TLE procedures in our center over a 24-year period.

Methods

From April 1997 through 2020, we attempted to extract 2964 leads in 1780 procedures and 1642 patients. We mainly utilized single sheath technique using snaring or mechanical rotational sheaths and steel sheaths when necessary. Difficult procedures were performed by an experienced cardiologist, and close supervision was emphasized. Most of the extractions were performed using local anesthesia with sedation.

Results

Median age of patients was 65.0 [interquartile range 20.00] years, and median dwelling time of leads was 5.0 [7.0] years. Clinical success was achieved in 1739 procedures (97.7%) and complete technical success in 2841 leads (95.8%). Clinical success (leaving <4 cm of the lead in the body and achieving the clinical goal for the patient) was achieved for 79 leads (2.7%). TLE failed in 44 leads (1.1%) and 41 procedures (2.3%) among 36 patients (2.2%). There were 23 cases (1.3%) of major complications, with only 1 death directly related to the procedure (<0.1%). In addition, 2 patients with sepsis died within the first 24 hours after the procedure. No caval tears occurred.

Conclusion

Single sheath lead extractions utilizing snaring or mechanical rotational sheaths were effective and safe in our high-volume center as performed by experienced operators.

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.

Cardiac tamponade as an inherent but potentially nonfatal complication of transvenous lead extraction: Experience with 1126 procedures performed using mechanical tools

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac tamponade (CT) is one of the most common and dangerous complications of transvenous lead extraction (TLE). So far, however, there has been little discussion about the problem.

METHODS

We analyzed the occurrence of CT in a group of 1226 patients undergoing TLE at a single reference center between June, 2015 and February, 2021. Using standard mechanical devices as first-line tools, a total of 2092 leads had been extracted.

RESULTS

CT occurred in 18 patients (1.47%): due to injury to the wall of the right atrium in 14 patients (1.14%) and other cardiac walls in four patients (0.33%). Younger patient age at first implantation, female gender, high left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), lower New York Heart Association class, low Charlson comorbidity index, longer implant duration, and the number of previous procedures related to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are important patient-related risk factors for CT. Significant procedure-related risk factors include the number of extracted leads, extraction of atrial leads and longer dwell time of extracted leads. Intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) provides a lot of information about pulling on various cardiac structures and is able to detect a very early phase of bleeding to the pericardial sac. As a result of implementing best practices guidance in performing extraction procedures and close collaboration with cardiac surgeons that allowed immediate rescue intervention in our series of 18 CT cases, there were no procedure-related deaths (mortality 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The need for rescue surgery due to CT has no influence on clinical and procedural success. Early diagnosed (TEE monitoring) and properly managed CT does not generate any additional risk in short- and long-term follow-up after TLE.

Repeat Transvenous Lead Extraction-Predictors, Effectiveness, Complications and Long-Term Prognostic Significance

BACKGROUND

Data regarding repeat transvenous lead extraction (TLE) are scarce. The aim of study was to explore the frequency of repeat TLE, its safety, predisposing factors, as well as effectiveness of repeat procedures.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a large single-center database of 3654 TLEs.

RESULTS

Repeat TLE was a rare occurrence (193, i.e., 5,28% among 3654 TLEs). Subsequent re-extractions occurred in 12.21% of the patients. Lead failure was the most common cause of re-extraction (51.16%). Cox regression analysis showed that patients who were older at first implantation [HR = 0.987; p = 0.003], had infection-related TLE [HR = 0.392; p < 0.001] and complete procedural success [HR = 0.544; p = 0.034] were less likely to undergo repeat TLE. Functional leads left in place for continuous use [HR = 1.405; p = 0.012] or superfluous leads left in place (abandoned) [HR = 2.370; p = 0.011] were associated with an increased risk of undergoing a repeat procedure. Overall mortality in patients with repeat TLE and subsequent re-extraction in the entire FU period was similar to that in patients without a history of re-extraction [HR = 0.949; p = 0.480].

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat TLE was a rare occurrence (5.28%) among TLEs. Left of both active and nonactive leads during TLE increased the risk of re-extraction. Re-extraction has no effect on the long-term mortality.

Tricuspid Valve Damage Related to Transvenous Lead Extraction

BACKGROUND

Damage to the tricuspid valve (TVD) is now considered either a major or minor complication of the transvenous lead extraction procedure (TLE). As yet, the risk factors and long-term survival after TLE in patients with TVD have not been analyzed in detail.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis used clinical data of 2631 patients (mean age 66.86 years, 39.64% females) who underwent TLE procedures performed in three high-volume centers. The risk factors and long-term survival of patients with worsening tricuspid valve (TV) function after TLE were analyzed.

RESULTS

In most procedures (90.31%), TLE had no negative influence on TV function, but in 9.69% of patients, a worsening of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) to varying degrees was noted, including significant dysfunction in 2.54% of patients. Risk factors of TLE relating to severe TVD were: TLE of pacing leads (5.264; p = 0.029), dwell time of the oldest extracted lead (OR = 1.076; p = 0.032), strong connective scar tissue connecting a lead with tricuspid apparatus (OR = 5.720; p < 0.001), and strong connective scar tissue connecting a lead with the right ventricle wall (OR = 8.312; p < 0.001). Long-term survival (1650 ± 1201 [1-5519] days) of patients with severe TR was comparable to patients without tricuspid damage related to TLE.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe tricuspid valve damage related to TLE is relatively rare (2.5%). The main risk factors for the worsening of TV function are associated with a longer lead dwell time (more often the pacing lead), causing stronger connective tissue scars connecting the lead to the tricuspid apparatus and right ventricle. TVD is unlikely to affect long-term survival after TLE.

Safety and Effectiveness of Transvenous Lead Extraction in Patients with Infected Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices; Is It More Risky than Extraction of Other Systems?

Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices is considered as more risky. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of TLE in patients with infected CRT systems. Methods: Data of 3468 patients undergoing TLE in a single high-volume center in years 2006−2021 were analyzed. The clinical and procedural parameters as well as the efficacy and safety of TLE were compared between patients with infected CRT and pacemakers (PM) and ICD systems. Results: Infectious indications for TLE occurred in 1138 patients, including 150 infected CRT (112 CRT-D and 38 CRT-P). The general health condition of CRT patients was worse with higher Charlson’s comorbidity index. The number of extracted leads was higher in the CRT group, but implant duration was significantly longer in the PM than in the ICD and CRT groups (98.93 vs. 55.26 vs. 55.43 months p < 0.01). The procedure was longer in duration, more difficult, and more complex in patients with pacemakers than in those in the CRT group. The occurrence of major complications and clinical and procedural success as well as procedure-related death did not show any relationship to the type of CIED device. Mortality at more than one-year follow-up after TLE was significantly higher among patients with CRT devices (22.7% vs. 8.7%) than among those in the PM group. Conclusion: Despite the greater burden of lead and comorbidities, the complexity and efficiency of removing infected CRT systems is no more dangerous than removing other infected systems. The duration of the implant seems to play a dominant role.

The role of cardiac surgeon in transvenous lead extraction: experience from 3462 procedures

INTRODUCTION

The professional society guidelines recommend that transvenous lead extraction (TLE) operating teams collaborate closely with cardiac surgeons in the management of life-threatening complications.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We assessed the role of cardiac surgeons participating in 3462 TLE procedures at a high-volume center between 2006 and 2021. The roles for cardiac surgery in TLE can be categorized into five areas: emergency surgical interventions for the management of cardiac laceration and severe bleeding (1.184%), cardiac surgery complementing partially successful TLE or vegetation removal (0.693%), delayed surgical treatment of TLE-related tricuspid valve dysfunction (0.751%), epicardial pacemaker implantation through sternotomy during emergency, complementing or delayed surgical interventions (0.607%) and delayed epicardial lead implantation (0.491%). Isolated damage to the wall of the right atrium was the most common cause of cardiac tamponade (53.66% of emergency surgeries) followed by injury to the right ventricle and vena cava (both 7.317%).

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency cardiac surgery for the management of severe hemorrhagic complications is still the most common treatment option. The remaining areas include surgery complementing partially successful TLE: repair of tricuspid valve or epicardial ventricular lead placement to achieve permanent cardiac resynchronization. The experience at a single high-volume TLE center indicates the necessity of close collaboration with the cardiac surgeons whose roles appear broader than the mere surgical standby. Mortality in patients who survived cardiac surgery during transvenous lead extraction does not differ from the survival of other patients after TLE without complications requiring surgical intervention. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Patient Related Outcomes of Mechanical lead Extraction Techniques (PROMET) study: A comparison of two professions

BACKGROUND

With an increasing number of cardiac implantable electronic devices, there has been a paralleled increase in demand for transvenous lead extraction (TLE). Cardiac surgeons (CS) and cardiologists perform TLE; however, data comparing the two groups of operators is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the outcomes of TLE performed by cardiologists and CS from six European lead extraction units.

METHOD

Data was collected retrospectively of 2205 patients who had 3849 leads extracted (PROMET) between 2005-2018. Patient demographics and procedural outcomes were compared between the CS and cardiologist groups, using propensity score matching. A multivariate regression analysis was also performed for variables associated with 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Cardiac surgeons performed the majority of extractions (59.8%), of leads with longer dwell times (90 [57-129 interquartile range (IQR)] vs 62 [31-102 IQR] months, CS vs cardiologists, p < 0.001) and with pre-dominantly non-infectious indications (57.4% vs 50.2%, CS vs cardiologists, p < 0.001). Cardiac surgeons achieved a higher complete success per lead than the cardiologists (98.1% vs 95.7%, respectively, p < 0.01), with a higher number of minor complications (5.51% vs 2.1%, p < 0.01) and similar number of major complications (0.47% vs 1.3%, p = 0.12). Thirty-day mortality was similarly low in the CS and cardiologist groups (1.76% vs 0.94%,p = 0.21). Unmatched data multivariate analysis revealed infection indication (OR 6.12 [1.9-20.3], p < 0.01), procedure duration (OR 1.01 [1.01-1.02], p < 0.01) and CS operator (OR 2.67, [1.12-6.37], p = 0.027) were associated with 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Transvenous lead extraction by CS was performed with similar safety and higher efficacy compared to cardiologists in high and medium-volume lead extraction centres. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Efficacy and safety of the new TightRail™ mechanical sheath for transvenous lead extraction: Results of a French multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of the TightRail™ sheath for pacemaker/defibrillator transvenous lead extraction (TLE).

METHODS

Multicenter observational study including patients who underwent a TLE with the TightRail™ sheath in five French university hospitals from September 2014 to January 2020.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-five patients (76% males, 71 ± 12 years) underwent a TLE procedure with the TightRail™. A total of 438 leads were extracted using the TightRail™, and the mean age of the extracted leads was 128 ± 85 months; of these, 344 (79%) were pacing leads and 94 (21%) were implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads. The overall clinical success of the extraction procedures was 93%. Overall, 410 of the 438 leads (95%) were extracted (complete or incomplete removal). After multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model, we found that lead age (odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI] for a 1 year increase: 1.11 [1.07-1.15], p < .001) and number of leads extracted (OR, 95% CI: 2.09 [1.50-2.96], p < .001) were the two independent factors associated with complete lead removal failure. Finally, there were 7 (3%) cases of major complications but no per-procedural death.

CONCLUSION

This is the first large-scale survey assessing the efficacy and safety profile of the Tightrail™ mechanical sheath. The clinical success rate was 93%, and the lead removal failure was dependent on the age and number of leads. We show a satisfactory safety profile in this cohort of patients from primarily low-volume centers with older leads.

An Alternative to Transvenous Lead Extraction in Selected Patients with CIED Infections—A Retrospective Outcome Study

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implants are rising in an older, more co-morbid population. The prevalence of CIED infection ranges from 1–4%. Whilst complete extraction of all transvenous hardware is recommended for infected, eroded, or pre-eroding CIEDs, this approach is not without risk and may be unacceptable to some patients. Long-term data on a more conservative strategy is lacking. We report on our experience of conservative management with pocket revision as a primary strategy in carefully selected patients. Method: A retrospective review of all CIED revision procedures was undertaken at a large tertiary center, over a 7-year period, with a mean follow-up timeframe of 39 months. Results: A total of 86 patients underwent 96 revision procedures; 7 patients required further revisions and 13 went on to undergo CIED extraction by the end of the follow-up period. The overall rate of mortality at 12 months was 8.1%, increasing to 24.4% at the end of the follow-up period. Conclusion: Our data provide important outcome information on an alternative strategy to lead extraction in carefully selected patients where the risk of extraction is perceived to be unacceptable. The absence of systemic infection appears to predict better outcomes than previously reported, and over two-thirds of patients remained complication-free at 12 months.

Successful transvenous lead extraction of abandoned lead implanted through persistent left superior vena cava

Persistent left superior vena cava, the most common thoracic venous anomaly, may complicate transvenous lead extraction (TLE). We report a successful case of TLE in a patient with persistent left superior vena cava, despite a long dwelling time and several pocket revisions due to pocket infection. The lead was removed via a hand-powered mechanical extraction sheath, and postoperative complications did not occur. Complicated TLE cases may have a better outcome if performed in a high-volume center with experienced specialists.

Lead extractions: dissecting adhesions up to the lead-tip of the right ventricle: safety and success-rates

AIMS

Goal of Transvenous Lead Extraction (TLE) is complete removal of all targeted leads, without complications. Despite counter traction manoeuvres, efficacy rates are often hampered by broken right ventricle lead (RV-lead) tips. Mechanically powered lead extraction (Evolution sheath) is effective, however safety of dissection up to the lead tip is unclear. Therefore, we examined the feasibility and safety of RV-lead extraction requiring dissection up to the myocardium.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From 2009 to 2018, all TLE in the Isala Heart Centre (Zwolle, The Netherlands) requiring the hand-powered mechanical Evolution system to extract RV-leads (n = 185) were examined from a prospective registry. We assessed 4 groups: TLE with the first generation Evolution (n = 43) with (A1,n = 18) and without (A2,n = 25) adhesions up to the myocardium and TLE with the Novel R/L type (n = 142) of sheath with (B1, n = 59) and without (B2, n = 83) adhesions up to the myocardium. Complete success rate in Group B was significantly higher than group A (96.5 vs 76.7%, p = 0.0354). When comparing the patients with adhesions up to the myocardium, total complete success is higher in the R/L group (61.1% vs 90.5%, p = 0.0067). There were no deaths. Overall major complication rates were low (2/185; 1.1%) and there was no statistically significant difference in major and minor complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Extraction strategy with the bidirectional Evolution R/L sheath for right ventricular leads with adhesions up to the myocardium is safe and feasible.

Efficacy and mortality of rotating sheaths versus laser sheaths for transvenous lead extraction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Rotating and laser sheaths are both routinely used in transvenous lead extraction (TLE) which can lead to catastrophic complications including death. The efficacy and risk of each approach are uncertain. To perform a meta-analysis to compare success and mortality rates associated with rotating and laser sheaths.

METHODS

We searched electronic academic databases for case series of consecutive patients and randomized controlled trials published 1998-2017 describing the use of rotating and laser sheaths for TLE. Among 48 studies identified, rotating sheaths included 1,094 patients with 1,955 leads in 14 studies, and laser sheaths included 7,775 patients with 12,339 leads in 34 studies. Patients receiving rotating sheaths were older (63 versus 60 years old) and were more often male (74% versus 72%); CRT-P/Ds were more commonly extracted using rotating sheaths (12% versus 7%), whereas ICDs were less common (37% versus 42%), p > 0.05 for all. Infection as an indication for lead extraction was higher in the rotating sheath group (59.8% versus 52.9%, p = 0.002). The mean time from initial lead implantation was 7.2 years for rotating sheaths and 6.3 years for laser sheaths (p > 0.05).

RESULTS

Success rates for complete removal of transvenous leads were 95.1% in rotating sheaths and 93.4% in laser sheaths (p < 0.05). There was one death among 1,094 patients (0.09%) in rotating sheaths and 66 deaths among 7,775 patients (0.85%) in laser sheaths, translating to a 9.3-fold higher risk of death with laser sheaths (95% CI 1.3 to 66.9, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Laser sheaths were associated with lower complete lead removal rate and a 9.3-fold higher risk of death.

Predictors of perforation during lead extraction: Results of the Canadian Lead ExtrAction Risk (CLEAR) study

BACKGROUND

Transvenous lead extraction can have serious adverse events, such as cardiac or vascular perforation. Risk factors have not been well characterized.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with perforation and death, and to characterize lead extraction in a large contemporary population.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicenter study examining patients undergoing lead extraction at 8 Canadian institutions from 1996 through 2016. Demographic and clinical data were used to identify variables associated with perforation and mortality using logistic regression modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 2325 consecutive patients (age 61.9 ±16.5 years) underwent extraction of 4527 leads. Perforation rate was 2.7% (63/2325) and 30-day mortality was 1.6% (38/2325), with mortality of 0.4% due to perforation (10/2325). Variables associated with perforation included no previous cardiac surgery (odds ratio [OR] 3.33; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54-7.19; P = .002), female sex (OR 3.27; 95% CI 1.91-5.60; P <.001); left ventricular ejection fraction ≥40% (OR 2.81; 95% CI 1.28-6.14; P = .010); lead age >8 years (OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.52-4.60; P <.001); ≥2 leads extracted (OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.23-5.04; P = .011); and diabetes (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.16-3.86; P = .014). Variables associated with death included infection as indication for extraction (OR 3.85; 95% CI 1.38-10.73; P = .010); anemia (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.38-6.61; P = .003), and patient age (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.07; P = .012).

CONCLUSION

Risk factors associated with perforation in lead extraction include no history of cardiac surgery, female sex, preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, lead age >8 years, ≥2 leads extracted, and diabetes.

Lead fixation mechanism impacts outcome of transvenous lead extraction: Data from the European Lead Extraction ConTRolled Registry

AIMS

The aims of this study is to characterize the transvenous lead extraction (TLE) population with active (A) compared with passive fixation (PFix) leads and to compare the safety, efficacy, and ease of extracting active fixation (AFix) compared with PFix right atrial (RA) and right ventricular (RV) leads.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The European Lead Extraction ConTRolled Registry (ELECTRa) was analysed. Patients were divided into three groups; those with only AFix, only PFix, and combined Fix leads. Three outcomes were defined. Difficult extraction, complete radiological, and clinical success. Multivariate model was used to analyse the independent effect of Fix mechanism on these outcomes. The study included 2815 patients, 1456 (51.7%) with only AFix leads, 982 (34.9%) with only PFix leads, and 377 (13.4%) with combined Fix leads. Patients with AFix leads were younger with shorter lead dwelling time. Infection was the leading cause for TLE among the combined Fix group with lowest rates among AFix group. No difference in complications rates was noted between patients with only AFix vs. PFix leads. Overall, there were 1689 RA (1046 AFix and 643 PFix) and 2617 RV leads (1441 AFix and 1176 PFix). Multivariate model demonstrated that PFix is independently associated with more difficult extraction for both RA and RV leads, lower radiological success in the RA but has no effect on clinical success.

CONCLUSION

Mechanism of Fix impact the ease of TLE of RA and RV leads and rates of complete radiological success in the RA but not clinical success. These findings should be considered during implantation and TLE procedures.

A Study of Major and Minor Complications of 1500 Transvenous Lead Extraction Procedures Performed with Optimal Safety at Two High-Volume Referral Centers

Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is the preferred management strategy for complications related to cardiac implantable electronic devices. TLE sometimes can cause serious complications. Methods: Outcomes of TLE procedures using non-powered mechanical sheaths were analyzed in 1500 patients (mean age 68.11 years; 39.86% females) admitted to two high-volume centers. Results: Complete procedural success was achieved in 96.13% of patients; clinical success in 98.93%, no periprocedural death occurred. Mean lead dwell time in the study population was 112.1 months. Minor complications developed in 115 (7.65%), major complications in 33 (2.20%) patients. The most frequent minor complications were tricuspid valve damage (TVD) (3.20%) and pericardial effusion that did not necessitate immediate intervention (1.33%). The most common major complication was cardiac laceration/vascular tear (1.40%) followed by an increase in TVD by two or three grades to grade 4 (0.80%). Conclusions: Despite the long implant duration (112.1 months) satisfying results without procedure-related death can be obtained using mechanical tools. Lead remnants or severe tricuspid regurgitation was the principal cause of lack of clinical and procedural success. Worsening TR(Tricuspid regurgitation) (due to its long-term consequences), but not cardiac/vascular wall damage; is still the biggest TLE-related problem; when non-powered mechanical sheaths are used as first-line tools.

Powered sheaths for lead extraction

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) has seen a rapid expansion in the past 20 years. The procedure has changed from early techniques involving simple manual traction that frequently proved themselves ineffective for chronically implanted leads, and carried significant periprocedural risks including death, to the availability of a wide range of more efficacious techniques and tools, providing the skilled extractor with a well-equipped armamentarium. The reduction in morbidity and mortality associated with these new extraction techniques has widened indications to TLE from prevalent use in life-threatening situations, such as infection and sepsis, to a more widespread use even in noninfectious situations such as malfunctioning leads. Powered sheaths have been a remarkable step forward in this improvement in TLE procedures and recent registries at high-volume centers report high success rates with exceedingly low complication rates. This review is aimed at describing technical features of powered sheaths as well as reported performance during TLE procedures.

Analysis of Risk Factors for Major Complications of 1500 Transvenous Lead Extraction Procedures with Especial Attention to Tricuspid Valve Damage

Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is a relatively safe procedure, but it may cause severe complications such as cardiac/vascular wall tear (CVWT) and tricuspid valve damage (TVD). Methods: The risk factors for CVWT and TVD were examined based on an analysis of data of 1500 extraction procedures performed in two high-volume centers. Results: The total number of major complications was 33 (2.2%) and included 22 (1.5%) CVWT and 12 (0.8%) TVD (with one case of combined complication). Patients with hemorrhagic complications were younger, more often women, less often presenting low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and those who received their first cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) earlier than the control group. A typical patient with CVWT was a pacemaker carrier, having more leads (including abandoned leads and excessive loops) with long implant duration and a history of multiple CIED-related procedures. The risk factors for TVD were similar to those for CVWT, but the patients were older and received their CIED about nine years earlier. Any form of tissue scar and technical problems were much more common in the two groups of patients with major complications. Conclusions: The risk factors for CVWT and TVD are similar, and the most important ones are related to long lead dwell time and its consequences for the heart (various forms of fibrotic scarring). The occurrence of procedural complications does not affect long-term survival in patients undergoing lead extraction.

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.

Recommendations for participation in leisure-time physical activity and competitive sports of patients with arrhythmias and potentially arrhythmogenic conditions. Part 2: ventricular arrhythmias, channelopathies, and implantable defibrillators

This paper belongs to a series of recommendation documents for participation in leisure-time physical activity and competitive sports by the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC). Together with an accompanying paper on supraventricular arrhythmias, this second text deals specifically with those participants in whom some form of ventricular rhythm disorder is documented, who are diagnosed with an inherited arrhythmogenic condition, and/or who have an implanted pacemaker or cardioverter defibrillator. A companion text on recommendations in athletes with supraventricular arrhythmias is published in the European Journal of Preventive Cardiology. Since both texts focus on arrhythmias, they are the result of a collaboration between EAPC and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). The documents provide a framework for evaluating eligibility to perform sports, based on three elements, i.e. the prognostic risk of the arrhythmias when performing sports, the symptomatic impact of arrhythmias while performing sports, and the potential progression of underlying structural problems as the result of sports.

Current practice in transvenous lead extraction in Latin America: Latin American Heart Rhythm Association survey

BACKGROUND

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is standard of care for the management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic device infection or lead-related complications. Currently, objective data on TLE in Latin America is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the current practice standards in Latin American centers performing TLE.

METHODS

An online survey was sent through the mailing list of the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society. Online reminders were sent through the mailing list; duplicate answers were discarded. The survey was available for 1 month, after which no more answers were accepted.

RESULTS

A total of 48 answers were received, from 44 different institutions (39.6% from Colombia, 27.1% from Brazil), with most respondents (82%) being electrophysiologists. Twenty-nine institutions (66%) performed <10 lead extractions/year, with 7 (16%) institutions not performing lead extraction. Although most institutions in which lead extraction is performed reported using several tools, mechanical rotating sheaths were cited as the main tool (66%) and only 13% reported the use of laser sheaths. Management of infected leads was performed according to current guidelines.

CONCLUSION

This survey is the first attempt to provide information on TLE procedures in Latin America and could provide useful information for future prospective registries. According to our results, the number of centers performing high volume lead extraction in Latin America is smaller than that reported in other continents, with most interventions performed using mechanical tools. Future prospective registries assessing acute and long-term success are needed.

Transvenous lead extraction: The influence of age on patient outcomes in the PROMET study cohort

BACKGROUND

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy contributes to an improvement in morbidity and mortality across all patient demographics. Patient age is a recognized risk factor for unfavorable outcomes in invasive procedures. This is the largest series of non-laser transvenous lead extraction (TLE) evaluating the association between patient age and procedure outcomes.

METHODS

Data of 2205 (3849 leads) patients was collected retrospectively from six European TLE centers between January 2005-December 2018 in the PROMET study. Of these, 153 patients with 319 leads were excluded for incomplete data. A comparison of outcomes was performed between the age groups young [< 50 years], young intermediate [50-69 years], older intermediate [70-79 years], and octogenarian [≥80 years].

RESULTS

Infection was most common indication for TLE in the octogenarian cohort, less common in the younger population (60.1% vs. 33.2%, respectively, p < .01). High-voltage leads were extracted most frequently from young patients, less frequently from octogenarians (31.6% vs. 10%, p < .001), while the opposite was evident for pacemaker leads (p < .001). Rotational sheath use was equally prevalent across all patient groups (p = .79). Minor and major complications across all the age groups were statistically similar, as was procedural success; the 30-day mortality was most significant in the octogenarian and least in the young patients (4.9% vs. 0.4%, p = .005). Propensity matching multivariate analysis found systemic infection, lead dwell time, and patient age (p = .013, OR 1.064 [1.013-1.116]) increased risk of 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

TLE is safe and effective across all age groups. 30-day mortality risk is significantly higher in the older patients.

Knowledge gaps, lack of confidence, and system barriers to guideline implementation among European physicians managing patients with CIED lead or infection complications: a European Heart Rhythm Association/European Society of Cardiology educational needs assessment survey

As the number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) grows, they are likely to present with issues to diverse groups of physicians. Guideline-adherent management is associated with improved prognosis in patients with CIED infection or lead problems but is insufficiently implemented in practice. The European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) with the support of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery, performed a multinational educational needs assessment study in ESC member countries, directed at physicians who might be confronted with CIED patients with complications. A total of 336 physicians from 43 countries, reached through the ESC mailing list, participated. They included a mix of electrophysiologists, cardiologists general physicians and cardiac surgeons .One hundred and twenty-nine (38%) of the respondents performed lead extraction. The survey included eight clinical cases and a self-evaluation question of knowledge and skills to apply that knowledge. The survey looked at 14 areas of care across five stages of the patient journey. Of the non-extracting physicians over 50% felt they lacked the knowledge and skills to make the diagnosis and refer for lead extraction and over 75% felt they lacked knowledge and skills to manage aspects of extraction and post-extraction care. Barriers to correct referral were logistic and attitudinal. Extracting physicians reported significantly higher rates of adequate skills and knowledge across all five stages of the patient journey (P < 0.05). We identified major gaps in physicians' knowledge and skills across all stages of CIED care. These gaps should be addressed by targeted educational activities and streamlining referral pathways.

Therapy and outcomes of cardiac implantable electronic devices infections

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection causes significant morbidity and mortality without appropriate treatment. It can present as incisional infection, pocket infection, systemic CIED infection, or occult bacteraemia. Complete percutaneous CIED extraction (excepted in case of incisional infection) and appropriate antibiotic therapy are the two main pillars of therapy. Device reimplantation, if needed, should be delayed sufficiently to allow control of the infection. Here, we address the differences in prognosis according to the clinical scenario and the different treatment options.