RIsk Stratification prior to lead Extraction and impact on major intraprocedural complications (RISE protocol)

LECOM (Lead Extraction COMplexity): A New Scoring System for Predicting a Difficult Procedure

(1) Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) can become far more complex when unanticipated difficulties arise. The aim was to develop a simple scoring system that allows for the prediction of the difficulty and complexity of this significant procedure. (2) Methods: Based on analysis of 3741 TLE procedures with and without complicating factors (extended fluoroscopy time, need for second-line instruments, and advanced techniques and instruments), a five-point Complex Indicator of Difficulty of (TLE) Procedure (CID-TLEP) scale was developed. Two or more points on the CID-TLEP scale indicate a higher level of procedure complexity. (3) Results: Patient age below 51 years at first CIED implantation, number of abandoned leads, number of previous procedures, passive fixation and multiple leads to be extracted, and a ratio of dwell time of oldest lead to patient age during TLE of >0.13 are significant predictors of higher levels of lead extraction complexity. The ROC analysis demonstrates that a point total (being the sum of the odds ratios of the above variables) of >9.697 indicates a 21.83% higher probability of complex TLE (sensitivity 74.08%, specificity 74.46%). Finally, a logistic function was calculated, and we constructed a simple equation for lead extraction complexity that can predict the probability of a difficult procedure. The risk of complex extraction (as a percentage) is calculated as [1/(1 + 55.34 · 0.754X)] · 100 (p < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: The LECOM score can effectively predict the risk of a difficult transvenous lead extraction procedure, and predicting the probability of a more complex procedure may help clinicians in planning lead removal and improving patient management.

Radiographic predictors of failure of simple manual traction of transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Extraction of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads could be a difficult procedure due to fibrous tissue around the lead and anatomical variations. In this report, we present our experience in the radiographic predictors of failure of simple manual traction (SMT) in patients with dual-coil ICD requiring lead extraction (LE).

METHODS

Between January 2017 and February 2021, 103 leads were removed in 65 consecutive patients; 65 (63.1%) were dual-coil ICD leads, 22 (21.4%) were atrial, and 16 (15.5%) were coronary sinus leads. Patient-based and procedural data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Clinical and procedural characteristics were compared and radiographic predictors of failure of SMT of ICD leads were assessed. Projected anteroposterior (AP) lead tortuosity was measured and lead slack score was estimated on chest X-ray (CXR).

RESULTS

Simple manual traction failed in 27 (42%) of the ICD leads. Ottawa slack score (odds ratio [OR] 2.368, 95% CI [1.261-4.447]; P = 0.007), AP lead tortuosity > 1.10 (OR 7.477, 95% CI [1.718-35.542]; P = 0.007), and number of previous interventions (OR 6.016, 95% CI [1.184-30.557]; P < 0.030) were found to be independently related to the failure of SMT. Receiver-operator characteristic curve analysis yielded an AP lead tortuosity cutoff value of > 1.10 for predicting the failure of SMT. The area under the curve was 0.744; the 95% confidence interval (CI) was 0.617 to 0.871 (P = 0.001), with a sensitivity of 63% and a specificity of 73%.

CONCLUSION

Simple manual traction success in our study varied based on radiographic lead-related parameters. Before planning the procedure, increased AP lead tortuosity in vasculature and higher lead slack score can be easily determined on CXR and may be associated with more fibrous adherences, the complexity of the LE, and failure of SMT.

The Year in Electrophysiology: Selected Highlights From 2022

This special article is the fifth in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors would like to thank the Editor-in-Chief, Dr Kaplan, the Associate Editor-in-Chief, Dr Augoustides, and the editorial board for the opportunity to author this series, which summarizes the key research papers in the electrophysiology (EP) field relevant to cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesiologists. These articles are shaping perioperative EP procedures and practices, such as pulsed-field ablation, cryoablation for first-line treatment for atrial fibrillation, advancements in conduction system pacing, safety issues related to smartphones and cardiac implantable electronic devices, and alterations in EP workflow as the world emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic. Special emphasis is placed on the implications of these advancements for the anesthetic care of patients undergoing EP procedures.

Disparities in transvenous lead extraction in young adults

Adults with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implanted at an early age constitute a specific group of patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction (TLE). The aim of this study is to assess safety and effectiveness of TLE in young adults. A comparative analysis of two groups of patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction was performed: 126 adults who were 19–29 years old at their first CIED implantation (early adulthood) and 2659 adults who were > 40 years of age at first CIED implantation and < 80 years of age at the time of TLE (middle-age/older adulthood). CIED-dependent risk factors were more common in young adults, especially longer implant duration (169.7 vs. 94.0 months). Moreover younger age of patients at first implantation, regardless of the dwell lead time, is a factor contributing to the greater development of connective tissue proliferation on the leads (OR 2.587; p < 0.001) and adhesions of the leads with the heart structures (OR 3.322; p < 0.001), which translates into worse TLE results in this group of patients. The complexity of procedures and major complications were more common in younger group (7.1 vs. 2.0%; p < 0.001), including hemopericardium (4.8 vs 1.3; p = 0.006) and TLE-induced tricuspid valve damage (3.2 vs.0.3%; p < 0.001). Among middle-aged/older adults, there were 7 periprocedural deaths: 6 related to the TLE procedure and one associated with indications for lead removal. No fatal complications of TLE were reported in young adults despite the above-mentioned differences (periprocedural mortality rate was comparable in study groups 0.3% vs 0.0%; p = 0.739). Predictors of TLE-associated major complications and procedure complexity were more likely in young adults compared with patients aged > 40 to < 80 years. In younger aged patients prolonged extraction duration and higher procedure complexity were combined with a greater need for second line tools. Both major and minor complications were more frequent in young adults, with hemopericardium and tricuspid valve damage being predominant.

Predictors of perforation during lead extraction: Results of the Canadian Lead ExtrAction Risk (CLEAR) study

BACKGROUND

Transvenous lead extraction can have serious adverse events, such as cardiac or vascular perforation. Risk factors have not been well characterized.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with perforation and death, and to characterize lead extraction in a large contemporary population.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicenter study examining patients undergoing lead extraction at 8 Canadian institutions from 1996 through 2016. Demographic and clinical data were used to identify variables associated with perforation and mortality using logistic regression modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 2325 consecutive patients (age 61.9 ±16.5 years) underwent extraction of 4527 leads. Perforation rate was 2.7% (63/2325) and 30-day mortality was 1.6% (38/2325), with mortality of 0.4% due to perforation (10/2325). Variables associated with perforation included no previous cardiac surgery (odds ratio [OR] 3.33; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54-7.19; P = .002), female sex (OR 3.27; 95% CI 1.91-5.60; P <.001); left ventricular ejection fraction ≥40% (OR 2.81; 95% CI 1.28-6.14; P = .010); lead age >8 years (OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.52-4.60; P <.001); ≥2 leads extracted (OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.23-5.04; P = .011); and diabetes (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.16-3.86; P = .014). Variables associated with death included infection as indication for extraction (OR 3.85; 95% CI 1.38-10.73; P = .010); anemia (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.38-6.61; P = .003), and patient age (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.07; P = .012).

CONCLUSION

Risk factors associated with perforation in lead extraction include no history of cardiac surgery, female sex, preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, lead age >8 years, ≥2 leads extracted, and diabetes.

Transvenous lead extraction in 1000 patients guided by intraprocedural risk stratification without surgical backup

BACKGROUND

Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) carries a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. Reliable preprocedural risk predictors to guide resource allocation and optimize procedural safety are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate an intraprocedural approach to risk stratification during elective TLE procedures.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent elective TLE of a pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead for noninfectious indications. The risk of TLE is judged intraprocedurally only after an attempt is made to extract the target lead as long as high-risk extraction techniques are avoided. TLE was performed in a well-equipped electrophysiology laboratory with rescue strategies in place but in the absence of surgical staff.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1000 patients were included in this analysis (527 female (52.7%); mean age 61.5 ± 10.2 years). TLE was attempted for 1362 leads, with a mean lead dwell time of 73 ± 43 months (median 70 months; interquartile range 12-180 months). TLE was successful in 914 patients, partially successful in 10, and failed in 76 patients. A laser sheath was required for extraction of 926 leads (68%). Only 1 patient developed intraprocedural cardiac tamponade requiring emergency pericardiocentesis. None of the patients developed hemothorax or required surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

At experienced centers, intraprocedural risk stratification for TLE that avoids high-risk extraction techniques achieved successful TLE in the majority of patients and can potentially help optimize the balance between efficacy, safety, and efficiency in lead extraction.