Venous System Interventions for Device Implantation

When and how to perform venoplasty for lead placement

Because of the increasing use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) with one or more intracardiac electrodes, the rate of lead failure is increasing. Moreover, upgrade of the CIED frequently is indicated for cardiac resynchronization therapy or other reasons. Both these situations require a new intervention, preferably using ipsilateral venous access. However, venous obstruction after CIED insertion occurs in 10%-20% of patients and poses a major obstacle for implantation of additional leads. Possible solutions include lead extraction, contralateral lead insertion, and venoplasty. Preprocedural venoplasty is associated with the lowest short- and long-term risks. Here we describe a step-by-step approach to this technique, which can be introduced and safely performed in most interventional catheterization laboratories.

Percutaneous extraction of a malpositioned subclavian arterial pacing lead using the retained wire technique and a vascular closure device: a case report

Background

Inadvertent lead malposition (ILM) in the left ventricle (LV) via the subclavian artery is a rare complication during the insertion of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED). If not identified, there is a risk of systemic thromboembolism. Transarterial pacing lead extraction often requires surgical removal and carries high risks of bleeding and thromboembolism, but percutaneous extraction has also been previously described.

Case summary

A 71-year-old female presented with left homonymous hemianopia on Day 1 post-insertion of a dual-chamber permanent pacemaker (PPM). A computed tomography (CT) angiogram of the brain and aortic arch revealed an acute occlusion of a branch of the right posterior circulating artery (PCA) and a malpositioned pacing lead in the left subclavian artery. Urgent percutaneous removal of the transarterial lead using the retained wire technique was successfully performed.

Discussion

Inadvertent lead malposition in the arterial system is rare and often requires lead extraction due to systemic thromboembolic complications. The retained wire technique has been previously described for percutaneous transvenous lead extraction and exchange, but to our knowledge, we are the first to report utilizing this technique for transarterial lead extraction. Using a case report, we highlight the utility, safety, and effectiveness of the retained wire technique in extracting a malposition lead in the subclavian artery and LV.

The Use of Transvenous Lead Extraction of Non-Infected Leads to Prevent Long-Term Lead-Related Complications

The aim of the investigation was to study the issue of making challenging decisions concerning abandonment or removal of non-infected superfluous leads during lead revisions or cardiac implantable electronic device upgrades.

EHRA expert consensus statement and practical guide on optimal implantation technique for conventional pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and the Latin-American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS)

With the global increase in device implantations, there is a growing need to train physicians to implant pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Although there are international recommendations for device indications and programming, there is no consensus to date regarding implantation technique. This document is founded on a systematic literature search and review, and on consensus from an international task force. It aims to fill the gap by setting standards for device implantation.

Left ventricular lead placement using inner guiding catheter alone in cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation

BACKGROUND

Subselection inner catheters (Inner-Cath) are used adjunctively with outer guiding catheters (Outer-Cath) during cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device implantation. This study aims to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of left ventricular lead placement (LV-LP) guided by Inner-Cath alone.

METHODS

A total of 74 patients undergoing de novo CRT implantation were investigated. LV-LP was initially guided by Inner-Cath in 42 patients (Inner-Cath group) and Outer-Cath in 32 patients (Outer-Cath group). In the Inner-Cath group, a 7Fr Inner-Cath was advanced to the coronary sinus through a 7 Fr sheath inserted in a subclavian vein. In the Outer-Cath group, 9Fr or 10Fr Outer-Caths were used. Success rate of LV-LP, additional use of inner or outer catheters and procedure-related complications were compared between groups.

RESULTS

LV-LP was successful in all patients in the Inner-Cath group, while LV-LP had to be abandoned in two patients (6.3%) of the Outer-Cath group due to CS perforation caused by Outer-Cath manipulation. Procedure time was significantly shorter in the Inner-Cath group (148 vs. 168 min; p = .024). Deployment of both an inner and outer cath became necessary less frequently for the Inner-Cath group (4.8% vs. 56.3%; p < .001). Mechanical CS injuries due to guiding catheter manipulation were only observed in the Outer-Cath group (0% vs. 15.6%, p = .013).

CONCLUSION

LV-LP guided by Inner-Cath alone was feasible in over 95% of the patients without severe complications. This methodology for LV-LP may be preferable in CRT candidates with severe LV dysfunction in terms of shorter procedure time, smaller guiding sheath, and less procedure-related complications.

Permanent pacemaker implantation in a hemodialysis patient with subclavian vein occlusion using the balloon-target puncture technique

The balloon-target puncture technique is an effective method to secure the subclavian vein access route of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices.

Comprehensive multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC; Secondary prevention and rehabilitation section) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary intervention including patient assessment and medical actions to promote stabilization, management of cardiovascular risk factors, vocational support, psychosocial management, physical activity counselling, and prescription of exercise training. Millions of people with cardiac implantable electronic devices live in Europe and their numbers are progressively increasing, therefore, large subsets of patients admitted in CR facilities have a cardiac implantable electronic device. Patients who are cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients are considered eligible for a CR programme. This is not only related to the underlying heart disease but also to specific issues, such as psychological adaptation to living with an implanted device and, in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients, the risk of arrhythmia, syncope, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, these patients should receive special attention, as their needs may differ from other patients participating in CR. As evidence from studies of CR in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is sparse, detailed clinical practice guidelines are lacking. Here, we aim to provide practical recommendations for CR in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients in order to increase CR implementation, efficacy, and safety in this subset of patients.

Comprehensive multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC; Secondary prevention and rehabilitation section) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary intervention including patient assessment and medical actions to promote stabilization, management of cardiovascular risk factors, vocational support, psychosocial management, physical activity counselling, and prescription of exercise training. Millions of people with cardiac implantable electronic devices live in Europe and their numbers are progressively increasing, therefore, large subsets of patients admitted in CR facilities have a cardiac implantable electronic device. Patients who are cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients are considered eligible for a CR programme. This is not only related to the underlying heart disease but also to specific issues, such as psychological adaptation to living with an implanted device and, in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients, the risk of arrhythmia, syncope, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, these patients should receive special attention, as their needs may differ from other patients participating in CR. As evidence from studies of CR in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is sparse, detailed clinical practice guidelines are lacking. Here, we aim to provide practical recommendations for CR in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients in order to increase CR implementation, efficacy, and safety in this subset of patients.

Is Venoplasty an Alternative to Lead Extraction for Patients With Venous Obstruction?

BACKGROUND

Indications for cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) have increased over time. Patients may require lead replacement or implantation due to lead failure or need for device upgrade. Venous obstruction is a common finding in these patients and often poses difficulties for operators. Venoplasty as an alternative to lead extraction emerges as an important intervention in the treatment of selected patients, particularly with a view to minimising procedural risk.

METHODS

Nine (9) patients with CIED related venous occlusion were treated with venoplasty at our institution between April 2006 and October 2019. Six (6) of nine patients were initially referred to our institution for consideration of transvenous lead extraction in the setting of venous occlusion. These patients are the subjects of the case series. Patient demographics, indication for venoplasty and procedural outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

We present a series of six patients in whom venoplasty has been performed at our centre as an alternative to lead extraction. Device and patient characteristics have been examined as well as radiation exposure and fluoroscopy time. The median age of our cohort was 64.5 years (range: 37-81 years) and 67% were female. Luminal calibre was improved in all patients allowing lead replacement, device upgrade or relief of symptoms. Procedural complications were not observed, and all patients remained free of symptoms related to venous occlusion at 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

We present venoplasty as a viable alternative to lead extraction in high risk patients or in those who favour a less invasive approach.

Navigating Challenging Left Ventricular Lead Placements for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a mainstay in the management of heart failure patients with electrical dyssynchrony. Left ventricular (LV) lead positioning remains an important variable that predicts the response to CRT. Anatomical and technical challenges can hinder optimal LV lead placement using traditional lead implantation approaches. Knowledge of normal anatomical variants and common anomalies is essential for successful LV lead implants. With advancements in tools and techniques for LV lead delivery, the implanting electrophysiologist can target the optimal LV pacing site, rather than accepting a suboptimal location that is less likely to provide clinical benefit. In this review, we discuss various challenges to achieving optimal LV lead implantation and present strategies to overcome them.

Wire countertraction for sheath placement through stenotic and tortuous veins: The “body flossing” technique

Background

Innominate vein stenosis and venous tortuosity are common findings during cardiac implantable electronic device upgrades or replacements and present a challenge to the implanting physician. Various techniques have been described to facilitate lead placement, including serial dilation, balloon venoplasty, and percutaneous access medial to the stenosis, each with its own benefits and risks.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the wire countertraction (“body flossing”) technique to facilitate sheath placement through tortuous and stenotic vessels.

Methods

Patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device procedures requiring the body flossing technique due to inability to place vascular sheaths over the wire through stenoses or tortuosity were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical characteristics, procedural equipment, and outcomes were analyzed.

Results

Simultaneous countertraction was successful in all attempted cases, including 8 patients with stenoses and 2 with tortuosity. In 2 of the stenosis cases, venoplasty had previously failed. No complications occurred.

Conclusion

Simultaneous countertraction (body flossing) is an effective tool to overcome venous stenosis and tortuosity that are amenable to wire advancement but not to vascular sheaths. It seems to be a safe and effective alternative to other techniques used in these scenarios.

Proposed treatment algorithm for cardiac device-related subclavian vein stenosis: a case series

Background

Subclavian vein obstruction may occur in patients with pacemaker leads, which may make the implantation of new pacemaker leads difficult.

Case summary

We report two cases in which upgrading to cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker was challenging due to total central vein occlusion. In the first case, a 78-year-old woman with permanent pacemaker implantation, 5 years ago, was successfully treated by balloon venoplasty. In the second case, balloon venoplasty was unsuccessful in a 46-year-old woman who has received twice single-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 12 years and 5 years ago, due to vessel crowding, so a contralateral side puncture, along with a tunnel technique, was performed to solve this problem.

Discussion

Cardiac implantable electronic device-related subclavian vein stenosis can present a challenge to common cardiac resynchronization therapy device upgrades in the absence of appropriate techniques.

Challenging Implants Require Tools and Techniques Not Tips and Tricks

The EP Clinics article "How to implant CRT devices in a busy clinical practice" describes the basics of the "interventional telescoping technique". This article focuses on specific circumstances where the tools and techniques are invaluable: (1) inability to locate the coronary sinus (CS), (2) inability to advance a catheter into the CS, (3) patients with CS atresia, (4) unstable CS access, (4) angulated target veins, (5) small and/or tortuous target veins, (6) target veins into which a wire cannot be advanced, (7) target veins with a drain pipe takeoff, (8) target veins close to the CS ostium.

How to Implant Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in a Busy Clinical Practice

Implantation of cardiac resynchronization therapy devices represents one of the more challenging and time-consuming procedures for the clinical electrophysiologist. This article reviews several strategies used to improve efficiency, safety, and effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation. The cornerstone of our strategy to improve efficiency, safety, and quality of cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation is the use of a telescoping guide system with high-quality venography. Competency in subclavian venoplasty and snaring techniques are essential to maintain efficiency and effectiveness during difficult cases.