Prognostic Value of Preoperative Echocardiographic Findings in Patients Undergoing Transvenous Lead Extraction

Ghost in the right atrium: A case report on successful identification of residual fibrous tissue

The term "ghost" refers to residual fibrous tissue that remains within the cardiovascular system following the removal of implanted device leads. In this case, a 75-year-old male underwent a transvenous lead extraction procedure prompted by an infection. After the procedure, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) revealed a stable "ghost" in the right atrium. Figures and videos dynamically depicted the ghost's morphology, clearly showing that one end of this spectral entity was firmly attached to the atrial wall, while the other end displayed unrestrained mobility within the bloodstream. After undergoing a thorough evaluation that confirmed the benign nature of the "ghost", there was evidently no need for medical intervention. In summary, the article portrayed a rare yet intriguing "ghost" observed during the perioperative period. Furthermore, this study emphasizes the crucial significance of accurately distinguishing between these "ghosts" and genuinely pathological structures. Such differentiation holds immense importance in preventing unnecessary medical interventions.

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.

"Ghost", a Well-Known but Not Fully Explained Echocardiographic Finding during Transvenous Lead Extraction: Clinical Significance

"Ghosts" are fibrinous remnants that become visible during transvenous lead extraction (TLE).

METHODS

Data from transoesophageal echocardiography-guided TLE procedures performed in 1103 patients were analysed to identify predisposing risk factors for the development of so-called disappearing ghosts-flying ghosts (FG), or attached to the cardiovascular wall-stable ghosts (SG), and to find out whether the presence of ghosts affected patient prognosis after TLE.

RESULTS

Ghosts were detected in 44.67% of patients (FG 15.5%, SG 29.2%). The occurrence of ghosts was associated with patient age at first system implantation [FG (OR = 0.984; p = 0.019), SG (OR = 0.989; p = 0.030)], scar tissue around the lead (s) [FG (OR = 7.106; p < 0.001, OR = 1.372; p = 0.011), SG (OR = 1.940; p < 0.001)], adherence of the lead to the cardiovascular wall [FG (OR = 0.517; p = 0.034)] and the number of leads [SG (OR = 1.450; p < 0.002). The presence of ghosts had no impact on long-term survival after TLE in the whole study group [FG HR = 0.927, 95% CI (0.742-1.159); p = 0.505; SG HR = 0.845, 95% CI (0.638-1.132); p = 0.265].

CONCLUSIONS

The degree of growth and maturation of scar tissue surrounding the lead was the strongest factor leading to the development of both types of ghosts. The presence of either form of ghost did not affect long-term survival even after TLE indicated for infection.

Risk Factors for Lead-Related Venous Obstruction: A Study of 2909 Candidates for Lead Extraction

Background: our knowledge of lead-related venous stenosis/occlusion (LRVSO) remains limited and there is still controversy regarding the risk factors for LRVSO. Venography is mandatory before transvenous lead extraction (TLE). Methods: we performed a retrospective analysis of venograms in 2909 patients (39.43% females, average age 66.90 years) who underwent TLE between 2008 and 2021 at high-volume centers. Results: the severity of LRVSO was likely to be dependent on the number of leads in the system (OR = 1.345; p = 0.003), the number of abandoned leads (OR = 1.965; p < 0.001), the presence of coronary sinus leads (OR = 1.184; p = 0.056), male gender (OR = 1.349; p = 0.003) and patient age at first CIED implantation (OR = 1.008; p = 0.021). The presence of permanent atrial fibrillation (OR = 0.666; p < 0.001) and right ventricular diastolic diameter (OR = 0.978; p = 0.006) showed an inverse correlation with the degree of LRVSO. The combined three-model multivariate analysis provided better prediction of LRSVO using the above-mentioned factors than the CHA2DS2-VASc score. Conclusions: the severity of LRVSO is probably dependent on the mechanical impact of the implanted/abandoned leads on the vein wall, therefore the study has demonstrated the central role of system-/procedure-related risk factors. The thrombotic mechanism may be less important, especially long after implantation, and for this reason the combined prediction model for LRVSO in this study was more effective than the CHA2DS2-VASc score.

The Influence of Lead-Related Venous Obstruction on the Complexity and Outcomes of Transvenous Lead Extraction

Background: Little is known about lead-related venous stenosis/occlusion (LRVSO), and the influence of LRVSO on the complexity and outcomes of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is debated in the literature. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of venograms from 2909 patients who underwent TLE between 2008 and 2021 at a high-volume center. Results: Advanced LRVSO was more common in elderly men with a high Charlson comorbidity index. Procedure duration, extraction of superfluous leads, occurrence of any technical difficulty, lead-to-lead binding, fracture of the lead being extracted, need to use alternative approach and lasso catheters or metal sheaths were found to be associated with LRVSO. The presence of LRVSO had no impact on the number of major complications including TLE-related tricuspid valve damage. The achievement of complete procedural or clinical success did not depend on the presence of LRVSO. Long-term mortality, in contrast to periprocedural and short-term mortality, was significantly worse in the groups with LRSVO. Conclusions: LRVSO can be considered as an additional TLE-related risk factor. The effect of LRVSO on major complications including periprocedural mortality and on short-term mortality has not been established. However, LRVSO has been associated with poor long-term survival.

The clinical role of transesophageal echocardiography during transvenous lead extraction

BACKGROUND

Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is commonly used during cardiothoracic procedures. TEE has also become standard during transvenous lead extraction (TLE) procedures, but its effect and role have not been optimally defined. The goal of this study is to identify how TEE was used during TLE at our institute and review its utility.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed high-risk patients undergoing TLE, for whom more complications during extraction procedures, from June 2012 to September 2020. The patients were divided into TEE group and non-TEE group according to real-time TEE monitoring. We compared the rate of procedural success, complications between two groups and concluded the clinical utility of TEE during TLE.

RESULTS

A total of 195 patients were included (105 in TEE group vs 90 in non-TEE group), the rate of procedure success (97.8% vs 96.5%, p = 0.41) and complications during extraction (8.6% vs 12.2%, p = 0.40, major complication 5.7% vs 12.2%, p = 0.11, minor complication 2.9% vs 0%, p = 0.30) were comparable. In TEE group, 12 patients (11.4%) received following benefits: altering surgical plans, guiding subsequent therapy strategies, and rapidly diagnosing complications, moreover no complications occurred from TEE.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that real-time monitoring by TEE cannot change the rate of procedural success and complication during TLE; however, TEE provides valuable information to instruct clinical therapy and improves the safety of TLE.