Caudal fluoroscopic guidance for the insertion of transvenous pacing leads

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundPneumothorax is a well‐recognized complication of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) insertion. While AP fluoroscopy alone is the most commonly imaging technique for subclavian or axillary access, caudal fluoroscopy (angle 40°) is routinely used at our institution. The caudal view provides additional separation of the first rib and clavicle and may reduce the risk of pneumothorax. We assessed outcomes at our institution of AP and caudal fluoroscopic guided pacing lead insertion.MethodsRetrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing transvenous lead insertion for pacemakers, defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices between 2011 and 2023. Both de novo and lead replacement/upgrade procedures were included. Data were extracted from operative, radiology, and discharge reports. All patients underwent postprocedure chest radiography.ResultsThree thousand two hundred fifty‐two patients underwent insertion of pacing leads between February 2011 and March 2023. Mean age was 71.1 years (range 16–102) and 66.7% were male. Most (n = 2536; 78.0%) procedures used caudal guidance to obtain venous access, while 716 (22.0%) procedures used AP guidance alone. Pneumothoraxes occurred in five (0.2%) patients in the caudal group and five (0.7%) patients in the AP group (p = .03). Subclavian contrast venography was performed less frequently in the caudal group (26.2% vs. 42.7%, p < .01).ConclusionCaudal fluoroscopy for axillary/subclavian access is associated with a lower rate of pneumothorax and contrast venography compared with an AP approach.