Outcomes and Complications of Lead Removal: Can We Establish a Risk Stratification Schema for a Collaborative and Effective Approach?
- 22 September 2015
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
- Vol. 38 (12) , 1439-1447
Abstract
Removal of an entire cardiovascular implantable electronic device is associated with morbidity and mortality. We sought to establish a risk classification scheme according to the outcomes of transvenous lead removal in a single center, with the goal of using that scheme to guide electrophysiology lab versus operating room extraction. Consecutive patients undergoing transvenous lead removal from January 2001 to October 2012 at Mayo Clinic were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 1,378 leads were removed from 652 (age 64 ± 17 years, M 68%) patients undergoing 702 procedures. Mean (standard deviation) lead age was 57.6 (58.8) months. Forty-four percent of leads required laser-assisted extraction. Lead duration (P < 0.001) and an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) lead (P < 0.001) were associated with the need for laser extraction and procedure failure (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.02). The major complication rate was 1.9% and was significantly associated with longer lead duration (odds ratio: 1.2, 95% confidence interval: 1.1–1.3; P < 0.001). High-risk patients (with a >10-year-old pacing or a >5-year-old ICD lead) had significantly higher major events than moderate-risk (with pacing lead 1–10 years old or ICD lead 1–5 years old) and low-risk (any lead ≤1-year-old) patients (5.3%, 1.2%, and 0%, respectively; P < 0.001). Transvenous lead removal is highly successful, with few serious procedural complications. We propose a risk stratification scheme that may categorize patients as low, moderate, and high risk for lead extraction. Such a strategy may guide which extractions are best performed in the operating room.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Multi-Institutional Study of Implantable Defibrillator Lead Performance in Children and Young AdultsCirculation, 2013
- Effect of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy on Reverse Remodeling and Relation to OutcomeCirculation, 2010
- Lead Extraction in the Contemporary Setting: The LExICon StudyJACC, 2010
- Deaths and cardiovascular injuries due to device-assisted implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and pacemaker lead extractionEP Europace, 2009
- Review of the ICD Registry's Third Year, Expansion to include Lead Data and Pediatric ICD Procedures, and Role for Measuring PerformanceHeart Rhythm, 2009
- Transvenous Lead Extraction: Heart Rhythm Society Expert Consensus on Facilities, Training, Indications, and Patient ManagementHeart Rhythm, 2009
- Transvenous removal of pacing and implantable cardiac defibrillating leads using single sheath mechanical dilatation and multiple venous approaches: high success rate and safety in more than 2000 leadsEuropean Heart Journal, 2008
- Rising Rates of Cardiac Rhythm Management Device Infections in the United States: 1996 through 2003JACC, 2006
- Prophylactic Implantation of a Defibrillator in Patients with Myocardial Infarction and Reduced Ejection FractionNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Recommendations for Extraction of Chronically Implanted Transvenous Pacing and Defibrillator Leads: Indications, Facilities, TrainingPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2000