Open AccessOutcomes of transvenous lead extraction in patients with lead perforation: A single‐center experience
Author(s) -
Zhou Xu,
Ze Feng,
Li Ding,
Wang Long,
Guo Jihong,
Li Xuebin
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
clinical cardiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.263
H-Index - 72
eISSN - 1932-8737
pISSN - 0160-9289
DOI - 10.1002/clc.23327
Subject(s) - medicine , pericardial effusion , surgery , perforation , lead (geology) , culprit , hemopericardium , single center , cardiac tamponade , cardiology , myocardial infarction , materials science , punching , geomorphology , metallurgy , geology
Background Management of cardiac perforation caused by the lead of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) is currently unclear. This study evaluated the outcomes of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in patients with cardiac perforation caused by a transvenous lead. Hypothesis Removal of perforated lead by transvenous approach is safe and effective. Methods The medical records of all patients diagnosed with cardiac perforation by a pacing or defibrillator lead in Peking University People's Hospital from January 2008 to January 2019 were reviewed. We included patients who were managed by TLE. Results A total of 53 patients (30 men; mean age: 67 ± 15 years) with lead perforation managed by TLE were included. Most of the perforated leads (94.9%) were pacemaker leads. Forty‐three leads (81.1%) were implanted within 1 year. Ten patients with a high risk of hemopericardium underwent percutaneous subxiphoid pericardial puncture prior to TLE. All 53 culprit leads were removed completely without major complications. Simple traction with or without a locking stylet was sufficient in 51 patients (96.2%). Forty‐eight patients (90.6%) had a new active‐fixation lead reimplanted. No patients showed evidence of new‐onset or worsening pericardial effusion during the procedure and hospital stay. During a median follow‐up time of 16 months, no recurrence of symptoms associated with lead perforation or CIED‐related infection were reported. Conclusion In most patients with lead perforation, TLE can be a safe and effective management approach.