Suppr超能文献

经股静脉途径使用鹅颈套圈经静脉取出起搏器导线。

Transvenous extraction of pacemaker leads via femoral approach using a gooseneck snare.

机构信息

Cardiology Department, Kartal Koşuyolu Heart and Vascular Disease Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Faculty of Medicine, Cardiology Department, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Herz. 2021 Feb;46(1):82-88. doi: 10.1007/s00059-020-04987-z. Epub 2020 Oct 2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The growing problem of endocardial lead infections and lead malfunctions has increased interest in percutaneous lead-removal technology. Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) via simple manual traction (SMT) is the first-line therapy. When SMT is not successful, TLE from the femoral vein using a gooseneck snare (GS) with a radiofrequency ablation catheter (RFAC) may be an alternative option. The aim of our study was to evaluate the success rate of transvenous extraction of chronically implanted leads via the femoral approach using a GS with RFCA in cases of failure with SMT.

METHODS

The study included 94 consecutive patients who were referred for lead extraction due to pocket erosion and infection (71 patients) and to lead malfunction (23 patients). Initially, SMT was attempted for all patients. If SMT was not successful, patients underwent TLE using a GS with RFAC.

RESULTS

Leads were extracted successfully with SMT in 34 patients (54 leads), while 60 patients (83 leads) underwent TLE using a GS with RFAC. The mean indwelling time of the leads was longer in the femoral approach with GS (87.5 ± 37.9 vs. 31.3 ± 25.8 months; p < 0.001). The procedural success rate was 96.7% in the femoral approach with GS. A preceding implantation lead duration of >51 months predicted an unsuccessful SMT necessitating alternative TLE using a GS with RFAC with 86% sensitivity and 78% specificity (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Transvenous lead extraction via the femoral approach using GS with RFAC may be an alternative approach to SMT with a high success rate, especially when the indwelling time of the leads is long.

摘要

背景

心内膜导线感染和导线故障的日益增多的问题增加了对经皮导线去除技术的兴趣。经静脉导线拔除(TLE)通过简单的手动牵引(SMT)是一线治疗方法。当 SMT 不成功时,使用带有射频消融导管(RFAC)的鹅颈套索(GS)从股静脉进行 TLE 可能是另一种选择。我们的研究目的是评估在 SMT 失败的情况下,使用带有 RFCA 的 GS 通过股静脉途径对慢性植入导线进行经静脉提取的成功率。

方法

该研究纳入了 94 例因口袋侵蚀和感染(71 例)和导线故障(23 例)而接受导线拔除的连续患者。最初,所有患者均尝试 SMT。如果 SMT 不成功,患者将接受使用 GS 和 RFAC 的 TLE。

结果

34 例患者(54 根导线)成功地通过 SMT 拔出了导线,而 60 例患者(83 根导线)接受了使用 GS 和 RFAC 的 TLE。GS 股静脉途径的导线留置时间更长(87.5±37.9 与 31.3±25.8 个月;p<0.001)。GS 股静脉途径的手术成功率为 96.7%。导线植入前持续时间>51 个月预示着 SMT 不成功,需要使用带有 RFAC 的 GS 进行替代 TLE,其灵敏度为 86%,特异性为 78%(p<0.001)。

结论

使用 GS 和 RFAC 通过股静脉途径进行经静脉导线拔除可能是 SMT 的一种替代方法,成功率高,尤其是当导线留置时间较长时。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验