BACKGROUND: after transvenous lead extraction (TLE) of cardiac implantable electric devices (CIEDs), some patients may not benefit from device reimplantation. This study sought to analyse predictors and long-term outcome of patients after TLE with vs. without reimplantation in a high-volume centre. METHODS: all patients undergoing TLE at our centre between January 2010 and November 2015 were included into this analysis. RESULTS: a total of 223 patients (median age 70 years, 22.0% female) were included into the study. Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) was the most common device (40.4%) followed by pacemaker (PM) (31.4%), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (26.9%), and cardiac resynchronization therapy-PM (CRT-P) (1.4%). TLE was performed due to infection (55.6%), malfunction (35.9%), system upgrade (6.7%) or other causes (1.8%). In 14.8%, no reimplantation was performed after TLE. At a median follow-up of 41 months, no preventable arrhythmia-related events were documented in the no-reimplantation group, but 11.8% received a new CIED after 17-84 months. While there was no difference in short-term survival, five-year survival was significantly lower in the no-reimplantation group (78.3% vs. 94.7%, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: in patients undergoing TLE, a re-evaluation of the indication for reimplantation is safe and effective. Reimplantation was not related to preventable arrhythmia events, but all-cause survival was lower.
Check the Need-Prevalence and Outcome after Transvenous Cardiac Implantable Electric Device Extraction without Reimplantation / D'Angelo, G.; Zweiker, D.; Fierro, N.; Marzi, A.; Paglino, G.; Gulletta, S.; Matta, M.; Melillo, F.; Bisceglia, C.; Limite, L. R.; Cireddu, M.; Vergara, P; Bosica, F.; Falasconi, G.; Pannone, L.; Brugliera, L.; Oloriz, T.; Sala, S.; Radinovic, A.; Baratto, F.; Malatino, L.; Peretto, G.; Nakajima, K.; Spartalis, M. D.; Frontera, A.; Della Bella, P.; Mazzone, P.. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE. - ISSN 2077-0383. - 10:(2021), p. 4043. [10.3390/jcm10184043]
Check the Need-Prevalence and Outcome after Transvenous Cardiac Implantable Electric Device Extraction without Reimplantation
VERGARA P;
2021
Abstract
BACKGROUND: after transvenous lead extraction (TLE) of cardiac implantable electric devices (CIEDs), some patients may not benefit from device reimplantation. This study sought to analyse predictors and long-term outcome of patients after TLE with vs. without reimplantation in a high-volume centre. METHODS: all patients undergoing TLE at our centre between January 2010 and November 2015 were included into this analysis. RESULTS: a total of 223 patients (median age 70 years, 22.0% female) were included into the study. Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) was the most common device (40.4%) followed by pacemaker (PM) (31.4%), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (26.9%), and cardiac resynchronization therapy-PM (CRT-P) (1.4%). TLE was performed due to infection (55.6%), malfunction (35.9%), system upgrade (6.7%) or other causes (1.8%). In 14.8%, no reimplantation was performed after TLE. At a median follow-up of 41 months, no preventable arrhythmia-related events were documented in the no-reimplantation group, but 11.8% received a new CIED after 17-84 months. While there was no difference in short-term survival, five-year survival was significantly lower in the no-reimplantation group (78.3% vs. 94.7%, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: in patients undergoing TLE, a re-evaluation of the indication for reimplantation is safe and effective. Reimplantation was not related to preventable arrhythmia events, but all-cause survival was lower.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
72 D'Angelo extraction JCM 2021.pdf
non disponibili
Licenza:
Non specificato
Dimensione
2.3 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.3 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


