Open heart · 2026
Transvenous lead extraction: predictors of procedure complexity.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Csillik Andrea, Gagyi Rita, Szőllősi Gergő József, Kardos Attila, Földesi Csaba, Som Zoltán, Vamos Mate, Nemes Attila, Saghy Laszlo, Szili-Torok Tamas
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Over the past decades, high-volume lead extraction centres gained broad experience in advanced transvenous lead extractions (TLE). However, access to advanced TLE techniques is limited, thus it would be beneficial to predict which extractions can be performed safely and effectively by simple procedures. We aimed to report on predictors of procedure complexity in clinically successful TLEs.
METHODS: Our retrospective study included 70 infectious TLEs, of which 65 were clinically successful. TLEs were defined as simple if only simple manual traction or a locking stylet was required, and complex if a rotational mechanical sheath or a femoral snare was used.
RESULTS: 42 patients underwent a complex procedure and 23 patients underwent a simple procedure. Overall, 129 leads were extracted. Complex procedures were characterised by longer lead dwell time (mean: 10.7±6.5 years vs 3.2±2.1 years; p<0.01), and a greater rate of passive lead extraction (50% vs 17.4%; p=0.02). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, longer lead dwell time (OR=1.69; 95% CI 1.24 to 2.30; p=0.001) was an independent predictor of procedural complexity. Among active fixation leads, the cut-off lead age for complex extractions was 4.5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: In the current single centre study, older lead age was the only independent predictor of procedural complexity. Based on this, the majority of infectious TLEs involving active fixation electrodes younger than 4.5 years may be safely performed even in centres where advanced TLE tools are unavailable.
METHODS: Our retrospective study included 70 infectious TLEs, of which 65 were clinically successful. TLEs were defined as simple if only simple manual traction or a locking stylet was required, and complex if a rotational mechanical sheath or a femoral snare was used.
RESULTS: 42 patients underwent a complex procedure and 23 patients underwent a simple procedure. Overall, 129 leads were extracted. Complex procedures were characterised by longer lead dwell time (mean: 10.7±6.5 years vs 3.2±2.1 years; p<0.01), and a greater rate of passive lead extraction (50% vs 17.4%; p=0.02). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, longer lead dwell time (OR=1.69; 95% CI 1.24 to 2.30; p=0.001) was an independent predictor of procedural complexity. Among active fixation leads, the cut-off lead age for complex extractions was 4.5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: In the current single centre study, older lead age was the only independent predictor of procedural complexity. Based on this, the majority of infectious TLEs involving active fixation electrodes younger than 4.5 years may be safely performed even in centres where advanced TLE tools are unavailable.