DOI 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2012.02392.x
Cardiac venous left ventricular lead removal and reimplantation following device infection: a large single-center experience.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Early series of biventricular device removal have contained mostly younger cardiac venous (CV) left ventricular leads and few have reported on rates of successful reimplantation.
METHODS AND
RESULTS
We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients referred to the Cleveland Clinic between February 2, 2001 and July 27, 2011 for removal of a biventricular device with a CV pacing lead for an infectious indication. A total of 173 patients were included. The median age of the CV leads was 22.3 months (interquartile range: 5.2-46.3 months). The complete procedural success rate for all leads was 97.7%, with the remaining 2.3% clinical successes. A total of 76.9% of CV leads were removed using simple traction alone with the remaining leads requiring the use of a laser-powered sheath. A total of 3.5% of leads required intervention (manual dissection or laser-powered dissection) within the coronary sinus (CS). Major complications occurred in 1.2% of patients. Minor complications occurred in 7.5% of patients, the majority of which were hematomas requiring drainage (6.9%). CV lead reimplantation was attempted in 107 patients of which 88 (82.8%) were successful.
CONCLUSION
CV lead removal in patients with an infected biventricular device is associated with an extremely high procedural success rate and a low incidence of major complications. The use of a laser-powered sheath is necessary in roughly one-quarter of cases with a very small percentage requiring intervention within the CS. Reimplantation of CV leads is achievable in roughly 83% of patients, a figure lower than nationally quoted estimates for de novo implantations.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.