Extraction and replacement of permanent pacemaker leads through occluded vessels: use of extraction sheaths as conduits--balloon venoplasty as an adjunct

Implications and Outcome of Permanent Coronary Sinus Lead Extraction and Reimplantation

OBJECTIVE

We examined the implications and outcome of coronary sinus (CS) lead removal including the feasibility of laser use within the CS.

BACKGROUND

Cardiac anatomy and lead interactions are more complex with the advent of biventricular pacemakers and atrial cardioverters requiring permanent lead/shocking coil placement in the coronary sinus and its branches.

METHODS

Fifty-five permanent cardiac leads were extracted during 2003 in 28 consecutive patients. Our study population included a 10/55 (18%) subset (all males; age 73 +/- 6 years; EF = 0.24 +/- 0.09) that underwent CS (1/10) or vein branch (9/10) lead extraction. Leads were extracted with an excimer laser sheath (n = 4) or by direct traction (n = 6). Median times between implantation and lead removal were 9.5 months (range 5-59) in the laser group and 3 months (range 3-4) in the direct traction group. Indication for extraction was infection (n = 4), dislodgement (n = 3), diaphragm stimulation (n = 2), and elevated threshold (n = 1). The CS was divided into distal, mid, and proximal segments by venogram.

RESULTS

Entry of the laser sheath into the CS was necessary in three of four laser patients. The two distal CS laser cases (left lateral CS coil and anterior-lateral left ventricular (LV) lead) required both 14- and 12-Fr sheaths, separately. The proximal CS laser case (posterior-lateral LV lead) required a 12 Fr sheath. The remaining laser patient required a 12-Fr sheath to pass to the mid SVC. There were no procedural complications as a result of CS lead extraction. Reimplantation of a CS lead was attempted in 7/10 patients at a median of 4 days (range 1-300). CS venograms were available for review in patients before initial implantation (6/10) and after extraction (7/10). The postextraction venograms demonstrated complete occlusion of the vein from which the lead was extracted, and its distal branches, which were unusable in 5/10 (50%). The vein occlusions were present in patients with indwelling leads for greater than 3 months and were independent of extraction method.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser lead extraction in the coronary sinus appears feasible in carefully selected cases with mandatory indications. However, special intraoperative monitoring and echocardiographic imaging with surgical backup ready is strongly recommended. Target vein selection may be limited for the purpose of reimplantation when leads are indwelling for greater than 3 months.

Central Venous Occlusion Is Not an Obstacle to Device Upgrade with the Assistance of Laser Extraction

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of laser-assisted lead extraction for upgrade of existing pacemakers and defibrillators in patients with central venous obstruction.

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardiac defibrillators and biventricular pacing have become the accepted therapeutic measures for patients with congestive heart failure. Many patients who are candidates for device therapy, however, already have existing right ventricular leads and the presence of central venous obstruction. Upgrade of existing devices in these patients is a dilemma, which is increasingly encountered by device-implanting physicians. Laser-assisted extraction of existing leads can facilitate access for device upgrade and provide an alternative to lead abandonment and contralateral implant.

METHODS

We review our experience with laser-assisted lead extraction in patients, referred for upgrade of existing devices, who were found to have, or known to have, ipsilateral subclavian vein occlusion.

RESULTS

Over the past 3 years, 18 patients (13 men, 5 women; mean age 63.9 +/- 16 years) with subclavian vein occlusion underwent successful laser-assisted lead extraction (total 29 leads) and upgrade of existing leads to defibrillators and/or biventricular systems. Mean implant duration prior to extraction was 70.8 +/- 43.5 (11-192) months. Cannulation of the coronary sinus and placement of a transvenous left ventricular lead were achieved in all 13 patients in whom it was attempted. No complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser-assisted lead extraction is a safe and effective approach, allowing for ipsilateral device upgrade in patients with existing devices and central venous obstruction.

Extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads

The common reasons for removal of pacing and defibrillator leads are infection, malfunction, or design defects such as fracture of J wires in Teletronics Accufix leads (Telectronics Pacing, Englewood, CO), which impose considerable risk for cardiac morbidity and mortality. Chronically implanted leads are fixed to the myocardium by fibrous tissue. Fibrous scar tissue may also encase the lead along its course. Furthermore, fragility of the lead and its tendency to break when extraction force is applied to overcome resistance imparted by the scar tissue add to the challenge of lead extraction. Thus, the extraction of chronically implanted leads is an important issue. Until a few years ago, the only methods available for the removal of chronically implanted leads were traction on the proximal segment of the lead and cardiac surgery. New techniques were developed to extract the leads by a transvenous approach using locking stylets, sheaths, snares, and retrieval baskets. Lead extraction using intravascular countertraction methods has since evolved as a specialty of its own. Progress has also been made in developing other system, such as Excimer laser energy for lead extraction. In this article, we discuss principles, techniques, and experience with these methods of extraction of chronic pacemaker and defibrillator leads.