Search

Background: Device complications, such as infection or lead dysfunction necessitating transvenous lead extraction (TLE) are continuously rising amongst patients with transvenous implantable-cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)., Objectives: Aim of this study was to characterize the procedural outcome and risk-factors of patients with indwelling 1- and 2-chamber ICD undergoing TLE., Methods: We conducted a subgroup analysis of all ICD patients in the GALLERY (GermAn Laser Lead Extraction RegistrY) database. Predictors for procedural failure and all-cause mortality were assessed., Results: We identified 842 patients with an ICD undergoing TLE with the mean age of 62.8 ± 13.8 years. A total number of 1610 leads were treated with lead dysfunction (48.5%) as leading indication for extraction, followed by device-related infection (45.4%). Lead-per-patient ratio was 1.91 ± 0.88 and 60.0% of patients had dual-coil defibrillator leads. Additional extraction tools, such as mechanical rotating dilator sheaths and snares were utilized in 6.5% of cases. Overall procedural complications occurred in 4.3% with 2.0% major complications and a procedure-related mortality of 0.8%. Clinical success rate was 97.9%. All-cause in-hospital mortality was 3.4%, with sepsis being the leading cause for mortality. Multivariate analysis revealed lead-age ≥10 years (OR:5.82, 95%CI:2.1-16.6; p = .001) as independent predictor for procedural failure. Systemic infection (OR:9.57, 95%CI:2.2-42.4; p < .001) and procedural complications (OR:8.0, 95%CI:2.8-23.3; p < .001) were identified as risk factors for all-cause mortality., Conclusions: TLE is safe and efficacious in patients with 1- and 2-chamber ICD. Although lead dysfunction is the leading indication for extraction, systemic device-related infection is the main driver of all-cause mortality for ICD patients undergoing TLE., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) has evolved as one of the most crucial treatment options for patients with cardiac device-related systemic infection (CDRSI)., Objective: The aim of this study was to characterize the procedural outcome and risk factors of patients with CDRSI undergoing TLE., Methods: A subgroup analysis of patients with CDRSI of the GALLERY (GermAn Laser Lead Extraction RegistrY) database was performed. Predictors for complications, procedural failure, and all-cause mortality were evaluated., Results: A total of 722 patients (28.6%) in the GALLERY had "systemic infection" as extraction indication. Patients with CDRSI were older (70.1 ± 12.2 years vs 67.3 ± 14.3 years; P < .001) and had more comorbidities than patients with local infections or noninfectious extraction indications. There were no differences in complete procedural success (90.6% vs 91.7%; P = .328) or major complications (2.5% vs 1.9%; P = .416) but increased procedure-related (1.4% vs 0.3%; P = .003) and all-cause in-hospital mortality (11.1% vs 0.6%; P < .001) for patients with CDRSI. Multivariate analyses revealed lead age ≥10 years as a predictor for procedural complications (odds ratio [OR] 3.23; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-6.60; P = .001). Lead age ≥10 years (OR 2.57; 95% CI 1.03-6.46; P = .04) was also a predictor for procedural failure. We identified left ventricular ejection fraction <30% (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.00-2.99; P = .049), age ≥75 years (OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.27-3.48; P = .004), chronic kidney disease (OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.17-3.14; P = .01), and overall procedural complications (OR 5.15; 95% CI 2.44-10.84; P < .001) as predictors for all-cause mortality., Conclusion: Patients with CDRSI undergoing TLE demonstrate an increased rate of all-cause in-hospital, as well as procedure-related mortality, despite having comparable procedural success rates. Given these data, it seems paramount to develop preventive strategies to detect and treat CDRSI in its earliest stages., (Copyright © 2022 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The GermAn Laser Lead Extraction RegistrY: GALLERY is a retrospective, national multicentre registry, investigating the safety and efficacy of laser lead extraction procedures in Germany., Methods and Results: Twenty-four German centres that are performing laser lead extraction have participated in the registry. All patients, treated with a laser lead extraction procedure between January 2013 and March 2017, were consecutively enrolled. Safety and efficacy of laser lead extraction were investigated. A total number of 2524 consecutive patients with 6117 leads were included into the registry. 5499 leads with a median lead dwell time of 96 (62-141) months were treated. The mean number of treated leads per patient was 2.18 ± 1.02. The clinical procedural success rate was 97.86% and the complete lead removal was observed in 94.85%. Additional extraction tools were used in 6.65% of cases. The rate of procedural failure was 2.14% with lead age  ≥10 years being its only predictor. The overall complication rate was 4.32%, including 2.06% major and 2.26% minor complications. Procedure-related mortality was 0.55%. Female sex and the presence of abandoned leads were predictors for procedure-related complications. The all-cause in-hospital mortality was 3.56% with systemic infection being the strongest predictor, followed by age ≥75 years and chronic kidney disease., Conclusion: In the GALLERY, a high success- and low procedure-related complication rates have been demonstrated. In multivariate analysis, female sex and the presence of abandoned leads were predictors for procedure-related complications, while the presence of systemic infection, age ≥75 years, and chronic kidney disease were independent predictors for all-cause mortality., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: S.P. reports grants and personal fees from Philips/Spectranetics, Medtronic, and AtriCure. H.B. reports grants and personal fees from Philips/Spectranetics, Cook Medical, Zoll Medical, Braun Medical, Abbott, Sorin Group/LivaNova, Impulse Dynamics, Biotronik, and Medtronic. B.O. reports grants and personal fees from Philips/Spectranetics and Medtronic. H.E. reports personal fees from Philips/Spectranetics. N.G. reports grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Bayer Vital. M.K. reports grants and personal fees from Philips/Spectranetics, Zoll Medical, Sorin Group/LivaNova, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and CVRx. H.R. reports personal fees from Medtronic. S.W. reports grants and personal fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer Vital, Acutus, and Daiichi Sankyo. S.H. reports grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Meril, Philips/Spectranetics, and Zoll Medical. All other authors have no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often have sleep apnea (SA), but diagnosis of SA with polysomnography is costly. SA monitoring is a pacemaker feature that measures respiratory disturbance index, the sum of abnormal respiratory events divided by sleep duration., Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and severity of SA and its association with AF in an unselected population fitted with pacemakers., Methods: RESPIRE (REgistry of Sleep APnea monItoring and Atrial Fibrillation in pacemakeR patients) was a multicenter, international, observational, open-label study following adult subjects for 18 months after implantation with an SA monitoring-enabled dual-chamber pacemaker. Severe SA was defined as average respiratory disturbance index ≥20 from implantation to follow-up visit. The first co-primary end point was the difference in significant AF (cumulative AF episodes lasting ≥24 hours over 2 consecutive days) between subjects with severe and those nonsevere SA at 12 months in the full analysis set (N = 553). The second co-primary end point was the rate of major serious adverse events at 18 months in the modified intention-to-treat set (N = 1024)., Results: Severe SA was detected in 31.1% (172 of 553). A higher incidence of significant AF was reported in patients with severe SA than in patients with nonsevere SA (25.0% vs 13.9%; difference 11.1%; 95% confidence interval 3.7%-18.4%; P = .002). Significant AF increased with time in both groups, but at a faster rate in the severe SA group. No intergroup difference in the overall rate of major serious adverse events was observed (P = .065)., Conclusion: SA screening over 12 months identified severe SA in almost one-third of unselected patients fitted with pacemakers. Severe SA was associated with a higher incidence of significant AF., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This report describes the reversal of a cardiac resynchronization therapy non-responder status in a patient with a surgically placed left ventricular lead by the use of a newly available active fixation coronary sinus lead.

Cardiac Resynchronization therapy (CRT) using coronary sinus (CS) leads is an established method for the therapy of congestive heart failure (CHF) in the case of inter- and intraventricular conduction delays. However implantation of CS leads is somewhat challenging due to a high number of peri- or postoperative dislocations at a rate of about 10%. The retained guidewire technique has been proposed for the implantation of coronary sinus leads for stabilization in case of repetitive intraoperative dislocations. This report describes CS lead and guidewire fracture 2 years after such an implant.