Section of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Section of Electrophysiology, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California.
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 Feb;4(2):193-200. doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2017.07.012. Epub 2017 Sep 27.
This study sought to assess the risk of collateral lead damage during cardiac implantable electronic device extraction.
With the increasing numbers of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices, there has been an increase in the number of percutaneous device and lead extractions. It is unknown how often collateral damage (defined as the need for unintended lead extraction, or loss of lead's integrity or dislodgement) occurs in the planned retained leads.
In this retrospective study, 108 patients who underwent incomplete cardiovascular implantable electronic device removal at the University of California, San Diego from September 2010 to September 2015 were included. The authors established the integrity of previously functioning leads at the end of each procedure as well as on follow-up visits using parameters including lead impedance change, threshold change, drop in P- or R-wave signal amplitude, or presence of lead noise.
Only 4 of 143 leads (2.7%) were found to have collateral damage. One right atrial (RA) lead had a clear insulation break, the second RA lead was found dislodged, and the third RA had a constant noise. The right ventricular lead was found to have a new high pacing threshold. Collateral lead age, extracted lead implantation site, collateral lead implantation site, and mode of lead extraction (laser, traction, or rotational dilator) did not have a significant correlation with the outcome of collateral lead damage.
Lead extraction can be performed safely; however, there is a small risk of damaging adjacent leads. Close follow-up is needed, especially for the first few months, to assess for the reconnected leads' integrity.
本研究旨在评估心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)取出过程中旁支导联损伤的风险。
随着心血管植入式电子设备数量的增加,经皮设备和导联拔除的数量也在增加。目前尚不清楚在计划保留的导联中,旁支损伤(定义为需要非计划的导联拔除,或导联完整性丧失或脱位)的发生频率。
在这项回顾性研究中,纳入了 2010 年 9 月至 2015 年 9 月期间在加利福尼亚大学圣地亚哥分校行不完全 CIED 移除术的 108 例患者。作者在每次手术结束时以及随访时使用包括导联阻抗变化、阈值变化、P 波或 R 波信号幅度下降或导联噪声存在等参数,确定先前功能正常导联的完整性。
仅 143 个导联中的 4 个(2.7%)发现有旁支损伤。1 个右心房(RA)导联有明显的绝缘断裂,第 2 个 RA 导联脱位,第 3 个 RA 导联有持续噪声。右心室导联的新起搏阈值升高。旁支导联的年龄、拔除导联的植入部位、旁支导联的植入部位以及导联拔除方式(激光、牵引或旋转扩张器)与旁支导联损伤的结果无显著相关性。
可以安全地进行导联拔除,但存在损伤相邻导联的风险。需要密切随访,尤其是在最初的几个月内,评估重新连接的导联的完整性。