Advances in clinical and experimental medicine : official organ Wroclaw Medical University · 2023
Employment of the Evolution RL sheath as a first-choice device shortens transvenous lead extraction time without affecting procedural safety and efficacy compared to its auxiliary use: Insights from the prospective multicenter EVO registry.
Многоцентровое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Przybylski Andrzej, Jagielski Dariusz, Hrymniak Bruno, Michalak Marcin, Wójcik Tomasz, Syska Paweł, Fabiszak Tomasz, Rokicki Jakub, Małecka Barbara, Ząbek Andrzej, Kaczmarek Krzysztof, Zaręba Lech, Sterliński Maciej
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is recommended in cases of local and systemic infections related to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Additionally, TLE is indicated in the event of lead damage or CIED malfunction. The extraction procedure is associated with a risk of life-threatening complications.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the EVO registry was to assess the safety and efficacy of birotational Evolution tool usage.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This registry study was prospectively conducted in 8 high-volume implantation centers in Poland. The study included 133 patients aged 63.5 ±15.1 years, and 76.69% were male. Indications for the procedure were: local or systemic infection (33.1%) and lead dysfunction (66.9%). The number of leads extracted varied from 1 (39.84%) to 3 (9.77%).
RESULTS: Clinical procedural success was achieved in 99.1% of cases. A total of 226 leads were extracted, and 206 used the Evolution system. Two procedural strategies were identified while using the Evolution system: (1) usage of locking stylet, propylene sheaths and the Evolution system (118 leads, 52%) - group A; (2) usage of locking stylet and Evolution (88 leads, 39%) - group B. There were no differences in the number of complications between these 2 groups. The extraction time was significantly shorter (p = 0.02) in group B than in group A. Major complications occurred in 5.2% of cases with 2 intraprocedural deaths. Minor complications occurred in 1.5% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The registry confirmed the efficacy and relative safety of the birotational Evolution sheath. Using the rotational sheath as a first attempt significantly reduces extraction time without compromising its safety.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the EVO registry was to assess the safety and efficacy of birotational Evolution tool usage.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This registry study was prospectively conducted in 8 high-volume implantation centers in Poland. The study included 133 patients aged 63.5 ±15.1 years, and 76.69% were male. Indications for the procedure were: local or systemic infection (33.1%) and lead dysfunction (66.9%). The number of leads extracted varied from 1 (39.84%) to 3 (9.77%).
RESULTS: Clinical procedural success was achieved in 99.1% of cases. A total of 226 leads were extracted, and 206 used the Evolution system. Two procedural strategies were identified while using the Evolution system: (1) usage of locking stylet, propylene sheaths and the Evolution system (118 leads, 52%) - group A; (2) usage of locking stylet and Evolution (88 leads, 39%) - group B. There were no differences in the number of complications between these 2 groups. The extraction time was significantly shorter (p = 0.02) in group B than in group A. Major complications occurred in 5.2% of cases with 2 intraprocedural deaths. Minor complications occurred in 1.5% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The registry confirmed the efficacy and relative safety of the birotational Evolution sheath. Using the rotational sheath as a first attempt significantly reduces extraction time without compromising its safety.