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

Author:

Levi Nir1,Bongiorni Maria Grazia2,Rav Acha Moshe1,Tovia-Brodie Oholi1,Kennergren Charles3,Auricchio Angelo4ORCID,Maggioni Aldo Pietro5,Rinaldi Christopher A6,Nof Eyal7ORCID,Ilan Michael1,Blomstrom-Lundqvist Carina8,Deharo Jean-Claude910,Leclercq Christophe11,Glikson Michael1,Michowitz Yoav1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Jesselson Integrated Heart Center, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine Hebrew University, 12 Shmuel Beit Street, Jerusalem 9103102, Israel

2. Department of Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria, Pisa, Italy

3. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden

4. Division of Cardiology, Istituto Cardiocentro Ticino, Lugano, Switzerland

5. ANMCO Research Center, Florence, Italy

6. Cardiology Department, St. Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK

7. Leviev Heart Institute, Sheba Medical Center, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Israel

8. Department of Medical Science and Cardiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

9. Assistance Publique − Hôpitaux de Marseille, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire La Timone, Service de Cardiologie, Marseille, France

10. Aix Marseille University, C2VN Marseille, France

11. Department of Cardiology, CHU Rennes, Rennes, France

Abstract

Abstract 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.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3