Laser for Transvenous Lead Extraction

Author(s):  
Roger Carrillo ◽  
Chris Healy
Keyword(s):  
2013 ◽  
Vol 61 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
B Sill ◽  
N Gosau ◽  
A Aydin ◽  
H Reichenspurner ◽  
H Treede

2015 ◽  
Vol 63 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Elfarra ◽  
W. Grimm ◽  
M. Irqsusi ◽  
S. Vogt ◽  
R. Moosdorf

2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Linder ◽  
S. Pecha ◽  
S. Zipfel ◽  
L. Castro ◽  
N. Gosau ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Melanie Maytin ◽  
Laurence M Epstein ◽  
◽  

Prior to the introduction of successful intravascular countertraction techniques, options for lead extraction were limited and dedicated tools were non-existent. The significant morbidity and mortality associated with these early extraction techniques limited their application to life-threatening situations such as infection and sepsis. The past 30 years have witnessed significant advances in lead extraction technology, resulting in safer and more efficacious techniques and tools. This evolution occurred out of necessity, similar to the pressure of natural selection weeding out the ineffective and highly morbid techniques while fostering the development of safe, successful and more simple methods. Future developments in lead extraction are likely to focus on new tools that will allow us to provide comprehensive device management and the design of new leads conceived to facilitate future extraction. With the development of these new methods and novel tools, the technique of lead extraction will continue to require operators that are well versed in several methods of extraction. Garnering new skills while remembering the lessons of the past will enable extraction technologies to advance without repeating previous mistakes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Tulecki ◽  
M Czajkowski ◽  
S Targonska ◽  
K Tomkow ◽  
D Nowosielecka ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The guidelines suggest close co-operation between TLE operating team and cardiac surgery and its key role in the management of life-threatening complications remains unquestionable. But the role of cardiac surgeon seems to be much more extended. Purpose We have analysed the role of cardiac surgery in treatment of patients undergoing TLE procedures. Methods Using standard non-powered mechanical systems we have extracted ingrown PM/ICD leads from 3207 pts (38,7% female, average age 65,7-y) during the last 14 years. Non-infectious TLE indications were in 66,4% of patients. 46% had PM DDD system, 19% PM SSI, 22% ICD, 9% CRT, 4% other systems. In 12% of patients abandoned leads were found. 8% of patients had one lead, 54% - two, 15% - three and 4% - 4–6 leads in the heart. An average dwell time of all leads was 91,5 mth. The lead entry side was left in 96% of patients, right in 3% and both – 4%. Results Procedural success 96,1%, clinical success - 97,8%, procedure-related death 0,2%. Major complications appeared in 1,9% (cardiac tamponade 1,2%, haemothorax 0,2%, tricuspid valve damage 0,3%, stroke, pulmonary embolism <1%). Conclusions Rescue cardiac surgery (for severe haemorrhagic complications) is still the most frequent reason of surgical intervention (1,1%). The second area of co-operation includes supplementary cardiac surgery after (incomplete) TLE (0,8%). The third one is connected with reconstruction or replacement of tricuspid valve, which can be affected by ingrown lead or damaged during TLE procedure (0,5%). Implantation of the complete epicardial system during any surgical intervention (rescue or delayed) should be considered as a supplementation of the operation (0,65%). Some of patients after TLE need implantation of epicardial leads for permanent epicardial pacing (0,6%) and some only left ventricular lead to rebuild permanent cardiac resynchronisation (0,5%). The single experience of large TLE centre indicates the necessity of close co-operation with cardiac surgeon, whose role seems to be more comprehensive than a surgical stand-by itself. Table 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Giannotti Santoro ◽  
L Segreti ◽  
G Zucchelli ◽  
V Barletta ◽  
A Di Cori ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Managing elderly patients with infection or malfunction deriving from a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) may be challenging. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of mechanical transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in elderly patients. Methods Patients who had undergone TLE in single tertiary referral center were divided in two groups (Group 1: ≥80 years; group 2:<80 years) and their acute and chronic outcomes were compared. All patients were treated with manual traction or mechanical dilatation. Results Our analysis included 1316 patients (group 1: 202, group 2: 1114 patients), with a total of 2513 leads extracted. Group 1 presented more comorbidities and more pacemakers, whereas the dwelling time of the oldest lead was similar, irrespectively of patient's age. In group 1 the radiological success rate for lead was higher (99.0% vs 95.9%; P<0.001) and the fluoroscopy time lower (13.0 vs 15.0 minutes; P=0.04) than in group 2. Clinical success was reached in 1273 patients (96.7%), without significant differences between groups (group 1: 98.0% vs group 2: 96.4%; P=0.36). Major complications occurred in 10 patients (0.7%) without significative differences between patients with more or less than 80 years (group 1: 1.5% vs group 2: 0.6%; P=0.24). In the elderly group no in-hospital mortality occurred (0.0% vs 0.5%; P=0.42). Conclusions Mechanical TLE in elderly patients is a safe and effective procedure. In the over-80s, a comparable incidence of major complications with younger patients was observed, with at least a similar efficacy of the procedure and no procedural-related deaths. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None


Hearts ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-212
Author(s):  
Giulia Massaro ◽  
Igor Diemberger ◽  
Matteo Ziacchi ◽  
Andrea Angeletti ◽  
Giovanni Statuto ◽  
...  

In recent decades there has been a relevant increase in the implantation rate of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), albeit with relevant geographical inhomogeneities. Despite the positive impact on clinical outcomes, the possibility of major complications is not negligible, particularly with respect to CIED infections. CIED infections significantly affect morbidity and mortality, especially in instances of delayed diagnosis and appropriate treatment. In the present review, we will start to depict the factors underlying the development of CIED infection as well as the difficulties related to its diagnosis and treatment. We will explain the reasons underlying the need to focus on prophylaxis rather than treatment, in view of the poor outcomes despite improvements in lead extraction procedures. This will lead to the consideration of management of this complication in a hub-spoke manner, and to our analysis of the several technological and procedural improvements developed to minimize this complication. These include prolongation of CIED longevity, the development of leadless devices, and integrated prophylactic approaches. We will conclude with a discussion regarding new devices and strategies under development. This complete excursus will provide the reader with a new perspective on how a major complication can drive technological improvements.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document