Safety and efficacy of transvenous lead extraction using mechanical (non-laser) extraction tools

Funding Acknowledgements

Type of funding sources: None.

Introduction

The rate of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is increasing with an increasing rate of complex devices being implanted. TLE is now a routine part of cardiac device management and up to date data on the safety and efficacy of TLE with modern tools and techniques is essential to management decisions regarding non-infectious indications for lead extraction.

Purpose

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of TLE in a contemporary cohort using mechanical (non-laser) extraction tools.

Methods

We present a contemporary, prospective review of TLE at our high-volume cardiac centre. All patients undergoing TLE from June 2016 and June 2019 were enrolled in our local database and baseline clinical data, procedural information and outcome data were collected.

Results

In total 561 leads were explanted (n=153) or extracted (n=408) from 341 patients over the study period. Patients were predominantly male (71%) with a mean age of 65 ± 17 years. The most common indication for lead removal was lead failure (45.2%, n=154) followed by infection of the pocket or device (29.3%, n=100). The mean dwell time of the 408 extracted leads was 7.2 years; 35% had a dwell time of 5-10 years, 23% had a dwell time >10 years and 4% had a dwell time >20 years (Figure 1). In total, complete success was achieved in 96.4% (n=541) leads, clinical success in a further 2.1% (n=12) and failure only in 1.4% (n=8). Clinical success was high (93%) even in leads with dwell time >20 years (Figure 2). There was an overall complication rate of 0.9% (3/341) for major complications and 1.5% (5/341) for minor complications. There were no deaths.

Conclusions

Our data would suggest that there are ongoing improvements in the safety profile and success rates of lead extraction undertaken by experienced operators now with a major complication rate of <1%.

Procalcitonin as a biomarker of cardiac implantable electronic device pocket infection: a prospective validation study

Funding Acknowledgements

Type of funding sources: None.

Introduction

The implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators is increasing along with the complexitly of these devices. CIED infection is an uncommon, but severe complication associated with the presence of a device and is associated with a high mortality and morbidity. Lead-related infections and frank endocarditis are associated with a systemic inflammatory response and, in general, are readily identified. Isolated pocket infections do not produce such a systemic response and are thus more complex to diagnose. There is a reliance on clinical accumen and examination of local signs of infection. There is thus a need for a reliable biomaker to help identify cases of pocket infection.

Aim

Our group have previously shown procalcitonin (PCT) to be a potentially useful biomaker in the clinial situation of possible pocket infection. We aim to prospectively validate the proposed cut-off value of 0.05ng/ml for the procalcitonin (PCT) biomaker in an independent cohort, which we have previously identified as showing promise in this clinical situation.

Methods

In this prospective case-control validation study the PCT levels of 81 patients with confirmed pocket infections were compared to 81 controls, matched for age and renal function, presenting for elective generator replacement or lead revision unrelated to infection. Exclusion criteria included: concomitant infectious or inflammatory diseases, end-stage renal failure, active malignancy or receiving immunosuppressive therapy.

Results

A PCT over 0.05 ng/ml was found in 68% (n= 55) of pocket infections and 24% (n= 19) of controls. Using the pre­defined cut-off value of 0.05 ng/ml PCT had a sensitivity of 68% and a specificity of 77% for diagnosing pocket infections. ROC analysis revealed area under the curve of 0.752 (standard error 0.039, p <0.001 ) for PCT. In patients presenting with minimal infective signs the sensivity remained high (67% vs 70% with extensive inflammation) and similarly remained high in thus who had received anti-biotic therapy prior to PCT sampling (65% vs 69%).

Conclusion

PCT is a potentially useful biomarker to aid the diagnosis of a pocket infection when used with the prospecitvely validated cut-off value of 0.05ng/ml. The sensitivity of the PCT positive result remained high even in patients pre-treated with antibiotics or with minimal clinical signs of inflammation.