Active-can implantable cardioverter defibrillator placement from a femoral approach

The long-term outcomes of cardiac implantable electronic devices implanted via the femoral route

Background

Conventional superior access for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is not always possible and femoral CIEDs (F‐CIED) are an alternative option when leadless systems are not suitable. The long‐term outcomes and extraction experiences with F‐CIEDs, in particular complex F‐CIED (ICD/CRT devices), remain poorly understood.

Methods

Patients referred for F‐CIEDs implantation between 2002 and 2019 at two tertiary centers were included. Early complications were defined as ≤30 days following implant and late complications >30 days.

Results

Thirty‐one patients (66% male; age 56 ± 20 years; 35% [11] patients with congenital heart disease) were implanted with F‐CIEDs (10 ICD/CRT and 21 pacemakers). Early complications were observed in 6.5% of patients: two lead displacements. Late complications at 6.8 ± 4.4 years occurred in 29.0% of patients. This was higher with complex F‐CIED compared to simple F‐CIED (60.0% vs. 14.3%, p = .02). Late complications were predominantly generator site related (n = 8, 25.8%) including seven infections/erosions and one generator migration. Eight femoral generators and 14 leads (median duration in situ seven [range 6–11] years) were extracted without complication.

Conclusions

Procedural success with F‐CIEDs is high with clinically acceptable early complication rates. There is a notable risk of late complications, particularly involving the generator site of complex devices following repeat femoral procedures. Extraction of chronic F‐CIED in experienced centers is feasible and safe.

Endovascular iliac vein recanalization for permanent pacemaker implantation in a patient who has long-term haemodialysis: a case report

Background

In chronic haemodialysis patients central veins occlusion occur very often. In such patients, permanent pacemaker placement implantation can be challenging and alternative approaches should be used.

Case summary

This is a case of 66-year-old male patient with complete atrioventricular block after a mitral valve (MV) surgery for endocarditis. The patient has a permanent surgically inserted haemodialysis catheter in right heart atrium after several unsuccessful attempts of endovascular recanalization of superior vena cava. A lead was implanted in the right ventricle after successful endovascular revascularization of the right iliac vein. The pacemaker was placed in a pouch on the right lower abdominal wall.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first reported case where a permanent single-chamber pacemaker was implanted through the right iliac vein after successful endovascular recanalization in chronic haemodialysis patient post-MV replacement.

Endovascular bi-ventricular pacing-defibrillator placement using a trans-atrial approach

Venous access for pectoral pacemaker and defibrillator lead placement can be compromised by venous occlusion due to previous pacing leads, access ports for medications such as chemotherapy, dialysis access, and other causes. On rare occasion, a femoral access is utilized for device placement. We report here a patient without venous access to the heart from either above or below due to retroperitoneal fibrosis. A bi-ventricular pacing-defibrillator was placed using a direct trans-atrial approach with good results. This minimally invasive approach to device placement may be useful in patients with poor venous access and avoids the placement of epicardial hardware.

Implantation of a biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator via the femoral vein

Permanent pacing with access gained via the femoral vein has been described since 1980. Here we describe implantation of a biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in a case where normal implantation using thoracic venous access was not possible due to anatomical anomalies. The advantages of this technique over epicardial pacing in such a case are discussed, as are the practical difficulties involved when applying this technique to the implantation of a biventricular ICD.

Permanent Transfemoral Pacemaker: A Single-Center Series Performed with an Easier and Safer Surgical Technique

INTRODUCTION

When venous access via the upper venous tree is not possible, the usual approach is to proceed to epicardial lead placement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This report presents a consecutive series of 12 permanent pacemaker systems utilizing the right femoral vein for venous access implanted between May 2001 and October 2004.

RESULTS

A modification of the previously reported surgical technique was used with a mean implant time of 52 minutes. Five were dual-chamber systems and seven were VVIR. All the leads implanted were active fixation. There was a 0% dislodgment rate and a mean follow-up of 18 months. During this time, three patients required revision or treatment of a pocket complication. All systems remained in the pacing mode as originally programmed with stable low sensing and pacing thresholds. There was no clinical evidence for acute or chronic venous thrombosis and no evidence of asymptomatic venous obstruction in eight patients who underwent echo-duplex studies.

CONCLUSION

We believe that the permanent femoral implant utilizing the technical modifications described in this article, offers an alternative to epicardial lead placement when the usual upper venous tree access is not available.

Successful Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Placement in an Ambulatory Patient Without Thoracic Venous Access

Evaluation of an individual requiring permanent cardiac pacing and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) function revealed no suitable thoracic vascular access for traditional device implantation. Because the patient refused cardiac surgery, a left femoral venous approach was used to introduce two extended-length, active fixation leads that were positioned in the right atrium and ventricle. The leads were tunneled to the abdomen and connected to a dual-chamber ICD. A low defibrillation threshold and robust pacing and sensing parameters were observed at implant. All of these parameters were stable at 6-month follow-up. In addition, no negative effects of the predominantly abdominal shock vector were observed. This case suggests that femoral ICD placement should be considered before routinely referring such patients for open chest surgery.