MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1093/europace/euz120

Медицинская библиотека · Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2019

The management of cardiac implantable electronic device lead perforations: a multicentre study.

Rav Acha Moshe, Rafael Allon, Keaney John J, Elitzur Yair, Danon Asaf, Shauer Ayelet, Taha Louay, Shechter Yonat, Bogot Naama R, Luria David, Ilan Michael, Singh Sheldon M, Mela Theofanie, Weisz Giora, Glikson Michael, Medina Aharon

СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

AIMS: Lead perforation is a rare, well-known complication of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implants, whose management is mostly not evidence-based. Main management strategies include conservative approach based on clinical and lead function follow-up vs. routine invasive lead revision approach. This study compared the complications of both strategies by composite endpoint, including recurrent perforation-related symptoms, recurrent pericardial effusion (PEf), lead dysfunction, and device infection during 12 month follow-up.

METHODS AND

RESULTS

Multicentre retrospective analysis, inquiring data from imaging studies, device interrogation, pericardiocentesis, and clinical charts of patients with suspected perforating leads between 2007 and 2014 in five hospitals. All cases were reviewed by electrophysiologist and defined as definite perforations by suggestive symptoms along with lead perforation on imaging, bloody PEf on pericardiocentesis shortly after implant, or right ventricular (RV) lead non-capture along with diaphragmatic stimulation upon bipolar pacing. Clinical outcomes associated with both management approaches were compared, with respect to the composite endpoint. The study included 48 definitive perforation cases: 22 managed conservatively and 26 via lead revision. Conservative management was associated with an increased composite endpoint compared with lead revision (8/22 vs. 1/26; P = 0.007). The dominant complication among the conservative cohort was appearance of cardiac tamponade during follow-up; 5/6 occurring in cases which presented with no or only mild PEf and were treated by antiplatelets/coagulants during or shortly after CIED implantation.

CONCLUSION

A conservative management of CIED lead perforation is associated with increased complications compared with early lead revision. Lead revision may be the preferred management particularly in patients receiving antiplatelets/coagulants.

Для цитирования: Rav Acha Moshe, Rafael Allon, Keaney John J, Elitzur Yair, Danon Asaf, Shauer Ayelet, Taha Louay, Shechter Yonat, Bogot Naama R, Luria David, Ilan Michael, Singh Sheldon M, Mela Theofanie, Weisz Giora, Glikson Michael, Medina Aharon. The management of cardiac implantable electronic device lead perforations: a multicentre study.. Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology. 2019. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euz120.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.