Suppr超能文献

铅植入物的持续时间并不总是能预测拔除的难易程度:在不到1年的时间里可能就需要拔牙鞘。

Lead implant duration does not always predict ease of extraction: extraction sheath may be required at < 1 year.

作者信息

Maytin Melanie, Epstein Laurence M, John Roy M

机构信息

Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011 Dec;34(12):1615-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2011.03225.x. Epub 2011 Oct 20.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Lead implant duration is a predictor of extraction sheath (ES) use in transvenous lead extraction (TLE). Most operators agree that leads with short implant durations can be extracted easily but data regarding defibrillator (implantable cardioverter-defibrillator [ICD]) leads and newer generation leads with backfilled coils are limited.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing TLE of leads with implant durations of ≤ 2 years at a single, high-volume center. Patient and lead characteristics, indications, and ES use were analyzed. Between January 2000 and January 2011, 139 patients underwent TLE meeting inclusion criteria. Mean implant duration was 13.2 ± 6.4 months. The cohort was 67% male with a mean age of 63 years (16-93) and left ventricular ejection fraction of 36 ± 17%. Indications for extraction included infection (51%), lead malfunction (27%), device upgrade (13%), and other indications (venous occlusion, severe chronic pain at site of device or lead, advisory leads, etc., 9%). Extraction was achieved with simple traction alone in 68% of the 239 leads removed. ES assistance with laser or femoral sheaths was employed in 32% of cases. ES use increased significantly with longer implant duration (P = 0.0004). In multivariate analysis, young age, the presence of an ICD, and increasing implant duration were the strongest predictors of the need for ES assistance for successful lead removal. There was no statistically significant difference in ES use between older and newer generation ICD leads (P = 0.68).

CONCLUSIONS

While leads with short implant durations may be extracted easily, the need for ES assistance is significant and frequently unpredictable even with newer generation ICD leads. Thus, operators should be fully prepared to use all available methods of extraction in every case regardless of implant duration.

摘要

引言

导线植入时间是经静脉导线拔除术(TLE)中使用拔除鞘(ES)的一个预测因素。大多数术者认为,植入时间短的导线易于拔除,但关于除颤器(植入式心律转复除颤器[ICD])导线以及带有回填线圈的新一代导线的数据有限。

方法与结果

我们在一个高容量的单一中心对连续接受植入时间≤2年的导线进行TLE的患者进行了一项回顾性研究。分析了患者和导线特征、适应证以及ES的使用情况。2000年1月至2011年1月期间,139例患者接受了符合纳入标准的TLE。平均植入时间为13.2±6.4个月。该队列中67%为男性,平均年龄63岁(16 - 93岁),左心室射血分数为36±17%。拔除适应证包括感染(51%)、导线故障(27%)、设备升级(13%)以及其他适应证(静脉闭塞、设备或导线部位的严重慢性疼痛、咨询性导线等,9%)。在拔除的239根导线中,68%仅通过简单牵引即可完成拔除。32%的病例采用了激光或股静脉鞘的ES辅助。随着植入时间延长,ES的使用显著增加(P = 0.0004)。多因素分析中,年轻、存在ICD以及植入时间增加是成功拔除导线需要ES辅助的最强预测因素。新一代和旧一代ICD导线在ES使用方面无统计学显著差异(P = 0.68)。

结论

虽然植入时间短的导线可能易于拔除,但即使对于新一代ICD导线,ES辅助的需求也很显著且常常不可预测。因此,无论植入时间长短,术者在每种情况下都应充分准备好使用所有可用的拔除方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验