Suppr超能文献

皮下植入式心律转复除颤器(S-ICD)导线拔除的系统评价

Systematic Review on S-ICD Lead Extraction.

作者信息

Vio Riccardo, Forlin Enrico, Čulić Viktor, Themistoclakis Sakis, Proietti Riccardo, China Paolo

机构信息

Department of Cardiothoracic, Vascular Medicine and Intensive Care, Dell'Angelo Hospital, 30174 Mestre-Venice, Italy.

Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences and Public Health, University of Padua, 35128 Padua, Italy.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2023 May 27;12(11):3710. doi: 10.3390/jcm12113710.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs) have emerged in recent years as a valid alternative to traditional transvenous ICDs (TV-ICDs). Therefore, the number of S-ICD implantations is rising, leading to a consequent increase in S-ICD-related complications sometimes requiring complete device removal. Thus, the aim of this systematic review is to gather all the available literature on S-ICD lead extraction (SLE), with particular reference to the type of indication, techniques, complications and success rate.

METHODS

Studies were identified by searching electronic databases (Medline via PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science) from inception to 21 November 2022. The search strategy adopted was developed using the following key words: subcutaneous, S-ICD, defibrillator, ICD, extraction, explantation. Studies were included if they met both of the following criteria: (1) inclusion of patients with S-ICD; (2) inclusion of patients who underwent SLE.

RESULTS

Our literature search identified 238 references. Based on the abstract evaluation, 38 of these citations were considered potentially eligible for inclusion, and their full texts were analyzed. We excluded 8 of these studies because no SLE was performed. Eventually, 30 studies were included, with 207 patients who underwent SLE. Overall, the majority of SLEs were performed for non-infective causes (59.90%). Infection of the device (affecting either the lead or the pocket) was the cause of SLE in 38.65% of cases. Indication data were not available in 3/207 cases. The mean dwelling time was 14 months. SLEs were performed using manual traction or with the aid of a tool designed for transvenous lead extraction (TLE), including either a rotational or non-powered mechanical dilator sheath.

CONCLUSIONS

SLE is performed mainly for non-infective causes. Techniques vary greatly across different studies. Dedicated tools for SLE might be developed in the future and standard approaches should be defined. In the meantime, authors are encouraged to share their experience and data to further refine the existing variegated approaches.

摘要

背景与目的

近年来,皮下植入式心律转复除颤器(S-ICD)已成为传统经静脉植入式心律转复除颤器(TV-ICD)的一种有效替代方案。因此,S-ICD植入数量不断增加,导致与S-ICD相关的并发症有时也随之增多,有时甚至需要完全移除设备。因此,本系统评价的目的是收集所有关于S-ICD导线拔除(SLE)的现有文献,特别关注适应证类型、技术、并发症及成功率。

方法

通过检索电子数据库(经由PubMed检索Medline、Scopus和Web of Science),检索时间从建库至2022年11月21日。采用的检索策略是使用以下关键词制定的:皮下、S-ICD、除颤器、ICD、拔除、取出。若研究同时符合以下两项标准,则纳入研究:(1)纳入S-ICD患者;(2)纳入接受SLE的患者。

结果

我们的文献检索共识别出238篇参考文献。基于摘要评估,其中38篇被认为可能符合纳入标准,并对其全文进行了分析。我们排除了其中8项研究,因为未进行SLE。最终,纳入30项研究,共207例接受SLE的患者。总体而言,大多数SLE是由于非感染性原因进行的(59.90%)。设备感染(影响导线或囊袋)是38.65%的SLE病例的原因。207例病例中有3例未提供适应证数据。平均植入时间为14个月。SLE采用手动牵引或借助专为经静脉导线拔除(TLE)设计的工具进行,包括旋转式或非动力机械扩张鞘。

结论

SLE主要是由于非感染性原因进行的。不同研究中的技术差异很大。未来可能会开发专门用于SLE的工具,应定义标准方法。同时,鼓励作者分享他们的经验和数据,以进一步完善现有的多样化方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d680/10254059/2be70cb2e550/jcm-12-03710-g001.jpg

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