Use of the new rotating dilator sheath TightRail™ for lead extraction: A bicentric experience

Prevention and Risk Assessment of Cardiac Device Infections in Clinical Practice

The implantation of cardiac electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers and defibrillators, has become increasingly prevalent in recent years and has been accompanied by a significant rise in cardiac device infections (CDIs), which pose a substantial clinical and economic burden. CDIs are associated with hospitalizations and prolonged antibiotic therapy and often necessitate device removal, leading to increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs worldwide. Approximately 1-2% of CIED implants are associated with infections, making this a critical issue to address. In this contemporary review, we discuss the burden of CDIs with their risk factors, healthcare costs, prevention strategies, and clinical management.

Comparison of non-laser and laser transvenous lead extraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is performed using non-laser and laser techniques with overall high efficacy and safety. Variation in outcomes between the two approaches does exist with limited comparative evidence in the literature. We sought to compare non-laser and laser TLE in a meta-analysis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and CENTRAL databases for TLE studies published between 1991 and 2021. From the included 68 studies, safety and efficacy data were carefully evaluated and extracted. Aggregated cases of outcomes were used to calculate odds ratio (OR), and pooled rates were synthesized from eligible studies to compare non-laser and laser techniques. Subgroup comparison of rotational tool and laser extraction was also performed. Non-laser in comparison with laser had lower procedural mortality (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.1%, P < 0.01), major complications (pooled rate 0.7% vs. 1.7%, P < 0.01), and superior vena cava (SVC) injury (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.5%, P < 0.001), with higher complete success (pooled rate 96.5% vs. 93.8%, P < 0.01). Non-laser comparatively to laser was more likely to achieve clinical [OR 2.16 (1.77-2.63), P < 0.01] and complete [OR 1.87 (1.69-2.08), P < 0.01] success, with a lower procedural mortality risk [OR 1.6 (1.02-2.5), P < 0.05]. In the subgroup analysis, rotational tool compared with laser achieved greater complete success (pooled rate 97.4% vs. 95%, P < 0.01) with lower SVC injury (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.7%, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Non-laser TLE is associated with a better safety and efficacy profile when compared with laser methods. There is a greater risk of SVC injury associated with laser sheath extraction.

Laser lead extraction in octo- and nonagenarians. A subgroup analysis from the GALLERY registry

INTRODUCTION

In an aging population with cardiac implantable electronic devices, an increasing number of octo- and even nonagenarians present for lead extraction procedures. Those patients are considered at increased risk for surgical procedures including lead extraction. Here, we investigated safety and efficacy of transvenous lead extraction in a large patient cohort of octo- and nonagenarians.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A subgroup analysis of all patients aged ≥80 years (n = 499) in the German Laser Lead Extraction Registry (GALLERY) was performed. Outcomes were compared to the nonoctogenarians from the registry. Primary extraction method was Laser lead extraction, with additional use of mechanical rotational sheaths or femoral snares, if necessary. An analysis of patient- and device characteristics, as well as an assessment of predictors for adverse events via multivariate analyses was conducted. Mean patients age was 84.3 ± 3.7 years in the octogenarians group and 64.1 ± 12.4 years in the nonoctogenarians group. The median lead dwell time was 118.0 months (78; 167) and 92.0 months [60; 133], p < .001 in the octogenarians and nonoctogenarians group, respectively. Clinical procedural success rate was achieved in 97.6% of the cases in octogenarians and 97.9% in nonoctogenarians (p = .70). Overall complication rate was 4.4% in octogenarians and 4.3% in nonoctogenarians (0.91). In octogenarians procedure-related mortality was 0.8% and all-cause in-hospital mortality was 5.4%, while in nonoctogenarians, procedure related and all-cause in-hospital mortality were 0.5% and 3.1%, respectively. A body mass index (BMI) <20 kg/m2 , was the only statistically significant predictor for procedure-related complications in octogenarians, while systemic infection, BMI ≤20 kg/m2 , procedural complications and chronic kidney disease were predictors for in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser lead extraction in octo- and nonagenarians is safe and effective. BMI ≤20 kg/m2 was the only statistically significant predictor for procedural complications. According to our data, advanced age should not be considered as contraindication for laser lead extraction.

Single center experience with the novel rotating dilator sheath TightRailTM Sub-C in transvenous lead extraction

INTRODUCTION

Transvenous lead extraction has become a frequent procedure in the context of device lead management and various tools are available. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of the novel short rotating dilator sheath TightRailTM Sub-C (Sub-C) in transvenous lead extraction.

METHODS

For this retrospective single-center analysis, we included consecutive patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction using the Sub-C from January 2018 until February 2020 at the University Heart Center Zurich.

RESULTS

A total of 87 leads were extracted within 45 patients using the Sub-C extraction sheath. The mean dwell time of the leads was 112 ± 9.1 months. Complete procedural success was achieved in 95.6% (43/45) and clinical procedural success in 97.8% (44/45). Two major complications (4.4%, 2/45) occurred, but neither was directly related to the Sub-C.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective single-center analysis suggests that transvenous lead extraction with a routine use of the TightRailTM Sub-C extraction sheath is a safe strategy resulting in high success rates that may offer useful theoretical benefits. Future studies are needed to evaluate the incremental benefit of a routine use of short extraction sheaths including the Sub-C during TLE procedures.

Transvenous Lead Extraction: Work in Progress

Cardiac implantable electronic devices are the cornerstone of cardiac rhythm management, with a significant number of implantations annually. A rising prevalence of cardiac implantable electronic devices coupled with widening indications for device removal has fuelled a demand for transvenous lead extraction (TLE). With advancement of tools and techniques, the safety and efficacy profile of TLE has significantly improved since its inception. Despite these advances, TLE continues to carry risk of significant complications, including a superior vena cava injury and mortality. However, innovative approaches to lead extraction, including the use of the jugular and femoral accesses, offers potential for further gains in safety and efficacy. In this review, the indications and risks of TLE are discussed while examining the evolution of this procedure from simple traction to advanced methodologies, which have contributed to a significant improvement in safety and efficacy.

Practical Approaches to Transvenous Lead Extraction Procedures-Clinical Case Series

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is regarded as the first-line strategy for the management of complications associated with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), when lead removal is mandatory. The decision to perform a lead extraction should take into consideration not only the strength of the clinical indication for the procedure but also many other factors such as risks versus benefits, extractor and team experience, and even patient preference. TLE is a procedure with a possible high risk of complications. In this paper, we present three clinical cases of patients who presented different indications of TLE and explain how the procedures were successfully performed. In the first clinical case, TLE was necessary because of device extravasation and suspicion of CIED pocket infection. In the second clinical case, TLE was necessary because occlusion of the left subclavian vein was found when an upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy was performed. In the last clinical case, TLE was necessary in order to remove magnetic resonance (MR) non-conditional leads, so the patient could undergo an MRI examination for the management of a brain tumor.

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.

Working on the dirty side—the ipsilateral subclavian access for temporary pacing after lead extraction

Background

Temporary pacing is necessary in pacemaker‐dependent patients after transvenous lead extraction (TLE) for cardiac implantable electronic device infection. In case of unavailability of other accesses, we propose to use the ipsilateral subclavian access (ISA) combined with a standard permanent active fixation lead for the temporary pacemaker and present preliminary data.

Methods

We consecutively enrolled patients undergoing TLE who received a temporary pacemaker using the ISA between August 2016 and April 2020 at our centre.

Results

During the observation period, 36 patients undergoing TLE for pocket infection (72.2%), endocarditis (25.0%) or other causes received a temporary pacemaker over the ISA. Their mean age was 77.0 ± 10.7 years, and 13.9% were female. Complete TLE was achieved in 94.4%. There were no major periprocedural complications. Intra‐hospital mortality was 11.1%. Pocket revision was performed in 19.4%. During long‐term follow‐up (23 ± 13 months), 8.3% had a relapse of local pocket infection and 2.8% needed rehospitalization for reintervention.

Conclusions

Temporary pacing using a standard permanent active fixation lead using the ISA is a convenient alternative to conventional venous accesses. However, risks of implanting a lead into a previously infected area have to be taken into account.

Transvenous lead extraction using the TightRail mechanical rotating dilator sheath for Asian patients

The need for transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is increasing worldwide including in Asia–Pacific regions. However, supporting evidence for TightRail, a relatively new rotating mechanical dilator sheath, is still lacking in Asian patients. The efficacy and safety of TLE using TightRail performed between March 2018 and June 2021 were evaluated in 86 consecutive patients with 131 leads. The mean lead age was 11.7 ± 7.3 (range, 1.0–41.4) years. Clinical and complete procedural success using TightRail were achieved in 93.0% and 89.5% of 86 patients, respectively, with 6 min of median fluoroscopic time and 9.3% of major complication rate: death (1.2%), cardiac tamponade (3.5%), severe tricuspid regurgitation (3.5%), and stroke (1.2%). However, in 46 patients with longest lead age ≤ 10 years, clinical/complete success and major cardiac complication rates turned out better as 97.8%, 95.7%, and 2.2%, respectively. Additionally, when patients were divided into 3 groups: the first 28, second 29, and the last 29 patients, there was a clear trend toward better efficacy and safety outcomes with more experience with TightRail (P_trend < 0.05). Longest lead age > 10 years was closely associated with TLE-related major cardiac complication (P = 0.046) with 85.7% sensitivity, 57.0% specificity, 15.0% positive predictive value, and 97.8% negative predictive values. In conclusion, TLE using TightRail may be effectively and safely performed by experienced operators for Asian patients with the longest lead age ≤ 10 years. However, as TightRail is a potentially aggressive tool, special attention should be paid to patients with longer lead dwelling times (e.g., > 10 years).

Tricuspid insufficiency after cardiac-implantable electronic device placement

Objective

Device-related estimates of incidence and significance of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is mainly based on case reports and small observational studies. We sought to determine whether right-heart device implantation increased the risk of TR in this interventional study.

Methods

All patients who underwent permanent pacemaker (PPM) or other device implantation were assessed for degree of TR at one year. The data collected was analyzed on IBM SPSS version 26. Descriptive statistics were applied for qualitative variables. Mean and standard deviation were applied for quantitative variables. Regression analysis and paired t-tests were applied for the degree of change and predictors of TR.

Results

Out of 165 participants, 73.94% were male. The mean age of the participants was 59.86 ± 12.03 years. Dual-chamber pacemaker (DDDR) was the most common device implanted (78.18%) causing significant TR and drop in left ventricular ejection fraction as compared to other devices (p-value < 0.05). The paired t-test for changes in ejection fraction (LVEF) and TR were also significant (p-value < 0.05). A regression model predicted significant TR to depend on baseline LVEF (p-value < 0.05).

Conclusion

Device-related worsening of TR is related to mechanical mechanisms. It is significantly associated with DDDR pacemakers after a 1-year follow-up.

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.

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.

Transvenous lead extraction outcomes using a novel hand-powered bidirectional rotational sheath as a first-line extraction tool in a low-volume centre

OBJECTIVES

Extraction of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in low-volume medical centres with limited clinical experience and an evolving lead extraction programme may be challenging. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of stepwise transvenous lead extraction (TLE) using a novel type of hand-powered rotational sheath as a first-line tool for extraction of chronically implanted devices in a single, low-volume centre.

METHODS

Sixty-seven consecutive patients undergoing a TLE procedure using the novel Evolution® RL rotational sheath as the first-line extraction tool between 2015 and 2019 at our institution were enrolled in the study. Their short-term and 30-day outcomes were observed.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine devices and 131 leads were explanted. Procedural and clinical success rates were 92.4% and 98.5%, respectively. Two procedures were classified as failures due to lead remnants >4 cm remaining in patients' vascular systems. One major (1.5%) and 3 minor (4.4%) adverse events and no deaths were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

TLE procedures, performed in a stepwise manner, using the Evolution RL sheath as a first-line extraction device and conducted by an experienced, surgically well-trained operator, offer excellent results with clinical and procedural success rates comparable to those, achieved in dedicated, high-volume institutions. Opting for optimal lead extraction approach in low-volume centres or institutions with evolving TLE programmes, a stepwise extraction strategy using the Evolution RL sheath by skilled operator may provide the optimal scheme with an excellent ratio between clinical and/or procedural success and complications.

Safety and efficacy of transvenous lead extraction of very old leads

OBJECTIVES

Transvenous lead extraction using mechanical rotational- or laser sheaths is an established procedure. Lead dwell time has been recognized as a risk factor for extraction failure and procedure-related complications. We therefore investigated the safety and efficacy of transvenous extraction of leads with an implant duration of more than 10 years.

METHODS

Between January 2013 and March 2017, a total of 403 patients underwent lead extraction in 2 high-volume lead extraction centres. One hundred and fifty-four patients with extraction of at least 1 lead aged over 10 years were included in this analysis. Laser lead extraction was the primary extraction method, with additional use of mechanical rotational sheaths or femoral snares, if necessary. All procedural- and patient-based data were collected into a database and retrospectively analysed.

RESULTS

Mean patient's age was 65.8 ± 15.8 years, 68.2% were male. Three hundred and sixty-two leads had to be extracted. The mean lead dwell time of treated leads was 14.0 ± 6.1 years. Complete procedural success was achieved in 91.6% of cases, while clinical success was achieved in 96.8%. Failure of extraction occurred in 3.2%. Leads that could not be completely removed had a significantly longer lead dwell time (18.2 vs 13.2 years; P = 0.016). Additional mechanical rotational sheaths or femoral snares were used in 26 (16.9%) patients. Overall complication rate was 4.6%, including 5 (3.3%) major and 2 (1.3%) minor complications. There was no procedure-related mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Transvenous lead extraction in leads aged over 10 years is safe and effective when performed in specialized centres and with use of multiple tools and techniques. Leads that could not be completely extracted had a statistically significant longer lead dwell time.

Safety and efficacy of transvenous lead extraction in octogenarians using powered extraction sheaths

BACKGROUND

In the aging population equipped with cardiac implantable electronic devices, an increasing number of octogenarians require lead extractions. This patient population is often considered as a high-risk group for surgical procedures. We, therefore, investigated the safety and efficacy of transvenous lead extraction in octogenarians using powered extraction sheaths.

METHODS

Between January 2013 and March 2017, 403 patients underwent lead extraction at two high-volume lead extraction centers. A total of 71 octogenarians were treated with laser lead extraction and were included in this analysis. Primary extraction method was laser lead extraction, with additional use of mechanical rotational sheaths or femoral snares, if necessary. Patient-based and procedural data were collected and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Mean age was 83.5 ± 3.3 years, 64.7% were males. A total of 152 leads were extracted. The mean lead dwell time of treated leads was 10.2 ± 5.2 years. Complete procedural success rate was 92.9%, while clinical success was achieved in 98.6%. Failure of extraction occurred in one patient (1.4%). In six (7.7%) patients, additional mechanical rotational sheaths or femoral snares were used. Overall complication rate was 4.2%, including one (1.4%) major (RA perforation) and two (2.8%) minor complications. No procedure-related mortality was observed in any of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Transvenous lead extraction in octogenarians with old leads is safe and effective when performed in experienced centers. Patient's age should therefore not be considered as contraindication for lead extraction using powered extraction sheaths.

Benefits of routine prophylactic femoral access during transvenous lead extraction

BACKGROUND

The number of patients requiring lead extraction has been increasing in recent years. Despite significant advances in operator experience and technique, unexpected complications may occur. Prophylactic placement of femoral sheaths allows for immediate endovascular access for emergency procedures and may shorten response time in the event of complications.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the benefits of routine prophylactic femoral access in patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction (TLE) and to evaluate the methods, frequency, and efficacy of the emergency measures used in those patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent TLE from January 2012 to February 2019. The data were analyzed with regard to procedural complications and deployment of emergency measures via femoral access.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-five patients (mean age 65.3 ± 15.5 years) were included in the study. Median lead dwell time was 84 months (interquartile range 58-144). Overall complication rate was 4.2% (n = 12), with 1.8% major complications (n = 5). Clinical success rate was 97.2%. Procedure-related mortality was 1.1% (n = 3). Femoral sheaths were actively engaged in 9.1% (n = 26) of cases. Deployment of snares was the most common intervention (n = 10), followed by prophylactic (n = 6) or emergency placement (n = 1) of occlusion balloons, temporary pacing (n = 3), venous angioplasty (n = 3), diagnostic venography (n = 3), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 1). We did not observe any femoral vascular complications due to prophylactic sheath placement.

CONCLUSION

Routine prophylactic placement of femoral sheaths shortens response time and quickly establishes control in the event of various complications that may occur during TLE procedures.

Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment of Adhesive Thrombo-Fibrotic Lead Encapsulations (TFLE) of Pacemaker and ICD Leads in Arrhythmia Patients-A Post Mortem Study

The demand for cardiac implantable electronic devices for arrhythmia therapy is still unabated and rising. Despite onward optimizations, lead-related problems such as infections or fractures often necessitate lead extraction. Due to adhesive thrombo-fibrotic lead encapsulations (TFLE) transvenous lead extraction is challenging and risky. However, knowledge on TFLEs and possible correlations with technical lead parameters and dwelling time (DT) were hitherto insufficiently studied. Therefore, we analyzed TFLEs of 62 lead from 35 body donor corpses to gain information for a potential lead design optimization. We examined both TFLE topography on the basis on anatomical landmarks and histo-morphological TFLE characteristics by means of histological paraffin sections and scanning electron microscopy of decellularized samples. The macroscopic analysis revealed that all leads were affected by TFLEs, mainly in the lead bearing veins. Half (47.2%) of the right-ventricular leads possessed adhesions to the tricuspid valve. On average, 49.9 ± 21.8% of the intravascular lead length was covered by TFLE of which 82.8 ± 16.2% were adhesive wall bindings (WB). The discrete TFLEs with at least one WB portion had a mean length of 95.0 ± 64.3 mm and a maximum of 200 mm. Neither sex, DT nor certain technical lead parameters showed distinct tendencies to promote or prevent TFLE. TFLE formation seems to start early in the first 1-2 weeks after implantation. The degree of fibrotization of the TFLE, starting with a thrombus, was reflected by the amount of compacted collagenous fibers and likewise largely independent from DT. TFLE thickness often reached several hundred micrometers. Calcifications were occasionally seen and appeared irregularly along the TFLE sheath. Leadless pacemaker systems have the advantage to overcome the problem with TFLEs but hold their own specific risks and limitations which are not fully known yet.

Mechanical extraction of cardiac implantable electronic devices leads with long dwell time: Efficacy and safety of the step up approach

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the stepwise mechanical transvenous lead extraction approach in a patient population with chronically implanted transvenous leads with a long dwell time. From January 2014 till December 2018, all lead extractions with lead dwell time ≥5 years performed at our tertiary centre were retrospectively analysed. A total of 173 leads, from 78 patients (median age 68 years; 81% male) with a median dwell time of 9 years (interquartile range [IQR] 5) were extracted, with three or more leads in 42% of the patients. Right atrial leads: 41%; right ventricular pacing leads: 16%; implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads: 31% (72% dual coil); coronary sinus leads: 12%. The majority (75%) of the leads had an active fixation. Most frequent indication for extraction was pocket infection/erosion (76%). Overall clinical success was 97%, and complete procedural success was 93%. Venous patency, assessed with venous angiography, was well preserved in 93% of the cases. The overall procedural complication rate was 3.8% (2.6% major and 1.3% minor). Despite the complexity of the population and a very long dwell time (median 9 years), a clinical success rate of 97% was achieved with the stepwise mechanical approach. Analysis of impeding progression of pectoral extraction suggests that dense fibrosis and sharp lead curvature in the transvenous trajectory pose a challenge. Complication rate was low, and acute venous patency was generally well preserved.

Hybrid transvenous lead extraction during cardiac surgery for valvular endocarditis

INTRODUCTION

In patients with endocarditis and cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), lead extraction is recommended according to current guidelines. In patients with short lead implant duration, lead extraction by manual traction might be sufficient for intraoperative lead removal. However, in patients with long implant duration, specialized extraction tools like laser or mechanical rotational sheaths are necessary. We report our experience with transvenous lead extraction during concomitant cardiac surgery for valvular endocarditis using mechanical rotational sheaths.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between December 2018 and April 2020, 12 patients were treated with transvenous lead extraction during open-heart surgery using mechanical rotational sheaths. Cardiac surgery was performed due to mitral, aortic, or tricuspid valve endocarditis. All patient-related and procedural data were collected, and in-hospital outcome was analyzed retrospectively. Mean patients' age was 65.2 ± 16.4 years, and 75.0% were male. Nine atrial, 15 ventricular, and 2 coronary sinus leads had to be extracted. The mean time from initial lead implantation was 94.3 ± 39.7 months. Complete procedural success was achieved in all patients with no major but one minor complication (pocket hematoma) occurring during lead extraction. Four patients with pacemaker dependency received epicardial leads, seven patients were treated in a two-step approach with endocardial leads, whereas one patient had no further CIED indication. No procedure-related mortality was seen. In-hospital survival was 91.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Valvular endocarditis surgery in combination with lead extraction using mechanical rotational sheaths is safe and feasible. It results in a high procedural success rate with prompt infection control by immediate removal of all infected lead materials.