Transvenous removal of pacing and ICD leads: single italian referral center experience

Abstract Introduction Device related complications are rising the need of Transvenous Lead Removal (TLR). Transvenous extraction of Pacing (PL) and Defibrillating Leads (DL) is a highly effective technique. Aim of this report is to analyse the longstanding experience performed in a single Italian Re...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European heart journal 2020-11, Vol.41 (Supplement_2)
Main Authors: Segreti, L, Giannotti Santoro, M, Di Cori, A, Fiorentini, F, Zucchelli, G, De Lucia, R, Viani, S, Paperini, L, Barletta, V, Soldati, E, Bongiorni, M.G
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue Supplement_2
container_start_page
container_title European heart journal
container_volume 41
creator Segreti, L
Giannotti Santoro, M
Di Cori, A
Fiorentini, F
Zucchelli, G
De Lucia, R
Viani, S
Paperini, L
Barletta, V
Soldati, E
Bongiorni, M.G
description Abstract Introduction Device related complications are rising the need of Transvenous Lead Removal (TLR). Transvenous extraction of Pacing (PL) and Defibrillating Leads (DL) is a highly effective technique. Aim of this report is to analyse the longstanding experience performed in a single Italian Referral Center. Methods Since January 1997 to December 2019, we managed 2769 consecutive patients (2100 men, mean age 65.5 years) with 5086 leads (mean pacing period 73.6 months, range 1–576). PL were 3998 (1828 ventricular, 1704 atrial, 466 coronary sinus leads), DL were 1088 (1067 ventricular, 6 atrial, 15 superior vena cava leads). Indications to TLR were infection in 79% (systemic 27%, local 52%) of leads. We performed mechanical dilatation using a single polypropylene sheath technique and if necessary, other intravascular tools; an Approach through the Internal Jugular Vein (JA) was performed in case of free-floating leads or failure of the standard approach. Results Removal was attempted in 5076 leads because the technique was not applicable in 10 PL. Among these, 4952 leads were completely removed (97.6%), 49 (1.0%) partially removed, 75 (1.4%) not removed. Among 4989 exposed leads, 818 were removed by manual traction (16.4%), 3664 by mechanical dilatation using the venous entry site (73.4%), 48 by femoral approach (FA) (1.0%) and 335 by JA (6.7%). All the free-floating leads were completely removed, 25.3% by FA and 74.7% by JA. Major complications occurred in 20 cases (0.72%): cardiac tamponade (19 cases, 4 deaths), hemotorax (1 death). Conclusions Our experience shows that in centers with wide experience, TLR using single sheath mechanical dilatation has a high success rate and a very low incidence of serious complications. TLR through the Internal Jugular Vein increases the effectiveness and safety of the procedure also in case of free-floating or challenging leads. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None
doi_str_mv 10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0839
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>oup_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_ehjci_ehaa946_0839</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0839</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0839</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c819-22f7a05d2f6beeb228293006551b291e5d6881021c59035f3e89f646a790ad953</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1OwzAQRi0EEqVwAVa-QMrYiV2bHSp_lSqxiRC7aOKMIVXqRHZbwe1JaQ_AZj5p9L3R6DF2K2AmwOZ39LV27TgRbaFnYHJ7xiZCSZlZXahzNgFhVaa1-bhkVymtAcBooSfsvYwY0p5Cv0s80qbfY8d7zwd0bfjkGBq-XDzyjrBJ9zyNu454u8WuxTD2PcU4Ao7CliKn74FiS8HRNbvw2CW6OeWUlc9P5eI1W729LBcPq8wZYTMp_RxBNdLrmqiW0kibA2ilRC2tINVoYwRI4ZSFXPmcjPW60Di3gI1V-ZTJ41kX-5TGd6ohthuMP5WA6iCm-hNTncRUBzEjlB2hfjf8p_8LwIdn0A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Transvenous removal of pacing and ICD leads: single italian referral center experience</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>Segreti, L ; Giannotti Santoro, M ; Di Cori, A ; Fiorentini, F ; Zucchelli, G ; De Lucia, R ; Viani, S ; Paperini, L ; Barletta, V ; Soldati, E ; Bongiorni, M.G</creator><creatorcontrib>Segreti, L ; Giannotti Santoro, M ; Di Cori, A ; Fiorentini, F ; Zucchelli, G ; De Lucia, R ; Viani, S ; Paperini, L ; Barletta, V ; Soldati, E ; Bongiorni, M.G</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Introduction Device related complications are rising the need of Transvenous Lead Removal (TLR). Transvenous extraction of Pacing (PL) and Defibrillating Leads (DL) is a highly effective technique. Aim of this report is to analyse the longstanding experience performed in a single Italian Referral Center. Methods Since January 1997 to December 2019, we managed 2769 consecutive patients (2100 men, mean age 65.5 years) with 5086 leads (mean pacing period 73.6 months, range 1–576). PL were 3998 (1828 ventricular, 1704 atrial, 466 coronary sinus leads), DL were 1088 (1067 ventricular, 6 atrial, 15 superior vena cava leads). Indications to TLR were infection in 79% (systemic 27%, local 52%) of leads. We performed mechanical dilatation using a single polypropylene sheath technique and if necessary, other intravascular tools; an Approach through the Internal Jugular Vein (JA) was performed in case of free-floating leads or failure of the standard approach. Results Removal was attempted in 5076 leads because the technique was not applicable in 10 PL. Among these, 4952 leads were completely removed (97.6%), 49 (1.0%) partially removed, 75 (1.4%) not removed. Among 4989 exposed leads, 818 were removed by manual traction (16.4%), 3664 by mechanical dilatation using the venous entry site (73.4%), 48 by femoral approach (FA) (1.0%) and 335 by JA (6.7%). All the free-floating leads were completely removed, 25.3% by FA and 74.7% by JA. Major complications occurred in 20 cases (0.72%): cardiac tamponade (19 cases, 4 deaths), hemotorax (1 death). Conclusions Our experience shows that in centers with wide experience, TLR using single sheath mechanical dilatation has a high success rate and a very low incidence of serious complications. TLR through the Internal Jugular Vein increases the effectiveness and safety of the procedure also in case of free-floating or challenging leads. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None</description><identifier>ISSN: 0195-668X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-9645</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0839</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>European heart journal, 2020-11, Vol.41 (Supplement_2)</ispartof><rights>Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com. 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,786,790,27957,27958</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Segreti, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giannotti Santoro, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Cori, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fiorentini, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zucchelli, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Lucia, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viani, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paperini, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barletta, V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soldati, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bongiorni, M.G</creatorcontrib><title>Transvenous removal of pacing and ICD leads: single italian referral center experience</title><title>European heart journal</title><description>Abstract Introduction Device related complications are rising the need of Transvenous Lead Removal (TLR). Transvenous extraction of Pacing (PL) and Defibrillating Leads (DL) is a highly effective technique. Aim of this report is to analyse the longstanding experience performed in a single Italian Referral Center. Methods Since January 1997 to December 2019, we managed 2769 consecutive patients (2100 men, mean age 65.5 years) with 5086 leads (mean pacing period 73.6 months, range 1–576). PL were 3998 (1828 ventricular, 1704 atrial, 466 coronary sinus leads), DL were 1088 (1067 ventricular, 6 atrial, 15 superior vena cava leads). Indications to TLR were infection in 79% (systemic 27%, local 52%) of leads. We performed mechanical dilatation using a single polypropylene sheath technique and if necessary, other intravascular tools; an Approach through the Internal Jugular Vein (JA) was performed in case of free-floating leads or failure of the standard approach. Results Removal was attempted in 5076 leads because the technique was not applicable in 10 PL. Among these, 4952 leads were completely removed (97.6%), 49 (1.0%) partially removed, 75 (1.4%) not removed. Among 4989 exposed leads, 818 were removed by manual traction (16.4%), 3664 by mechanical dilatation using the venous entry site (73.4%), 48 by femoral approach (FA) (1.0%) and 335 by JA (6.7%). All the free-floating leads were completely removed, 25.3% by FA and 74.7% by JA. Major complications occurred in 20 cases (0.72%): cardiac tamponade (19 cases, 4 deaths), hemotorax (1 death). Conclusions Our experience shows that in centers with wide experience, TLR using single sheath mechanical dilatation has a high success rate and a very low incidence of serious complications. TLR through the Internal Jugular Vein increases the effectiveness and safety of the procedure also in case of free-floating or challenging leads. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None</description><issn>0195-668X</issn><issn>1522-9645</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkE1OwzAQRi0EEqVwAVa-QMrYiV2bHSp_lSqxiRC7aOKMIVXqRHZbwe1JaQ_AZj5p9L3R6DF2K2AmwOZ39LV27TgRbaFnYHJ7xiZCSZlZXahzNgFhVaa1-bhkVymtAcBooSfsvYwY0p5Cv0s80qbfY8d7zwd0bfjkGBq-XDzyjrBJ9zyNu454u8WuxTD2PcU4Ao7CliKn74FiS8HRNbvw2CW6OeWUlc9P5eI1W729LBcPq8wZYTMp_RxBNdLrmqiW0kibA2ilRC2tINVoYwRI4ZSFXPmcjPW60Di3gI1V-ZTJ41kX-5TGd6ohthuMP5WA6iCm-hNTncRUBzEjlB2hfjf8p_8LwIdn0A</recordid><startdate>20201101</startdate><enddate>20201101</enddate><creator>Segreti, L</creator><creator>Giannotti Santoro, M</creator><creator>Di Cori, A</creator><creator>Fiorentini, F</creator><creator>Zucchelli, G</creator><creator>De Lucia, R</creator><creator>Viani, S</creator><creator>Paperini, L</creator><creator>Barletta, V</creator><creator>Soldati, E</creator><creator>Bongiorni, M.G</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20201101</creationdate><title>Transvenous removal of pacing and ICD leads: single italian referral center experience</title><author>Segreti, L ; Giannotti Santoro, M ; Di Cori, A ; Fiorentini, F ; Zucchelli, G ; De Lucia, R ; Viani, S ; Paperini, L ; Barletta, V ; Soldati, E ; Bongiorni, M.G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c819-22f7a05d2f6beeb228293006551b291e5d6881021c59035f3e89f646a790ad953</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Segreti, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giannotti Santoro, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Cori, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fiorentini, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zucchelli, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Lucia, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viani, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paperini, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barletta, V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soldati, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bongiorni, M.G</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>European heart journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Segreti, L</au><au>Giannotti Santoro, M</au><au>Di Cori, A</au><au>Fiorentini, F</au><au>Zucchelli, G</au><au>De Lucia, R</au><au>Viani, S</au><au>Paperini, L</au><au>Barletta, V</au><au>Soldati, E</au><au>Bongiorni, M.G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Transvenous removal of pacing and ICD leads: single italian referral center experience</atitle><jtitle>European heart journal</jtitle><date>2020-11-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>Supplement_2</issue><issn>0195-668X</issn><eissn>1522-9645</eissn><abstract>Abstract Introduction Device related complications are rising the need of Transvenous Lead Removal (TLR). Transvenous extraction of Pacing (PL) and Defibrillating Leads (DL) is a highly effective technique. Aim of this report is to analyse the longstanding experience performed in a single Italian Referral Center. Methods Since January 1997 to December 2019, we managed 2769 consecutive patients (2100 men, mean age 65.5 years) with 5086 leads (mean pacing period 73.6 months, range 1–576). PL were 3998 (1828 ventricular, 1704 atrial, 466 coronary sinus leads), DL were 1088 (1067 ventricular, 6 atrial, 15 superior vena cava leads). Indications to TLR were infection in 79% (systemic 27%, local 52%) of leads. We performed mechanical dilatation using a single polypropylene sheath technique and if necessary, other intravascular tools; an Approach through the Internal Jugular Vein (JA) was performed in case of free-floating leads or failure of the standard approach. Results Removal was attempted in 5076 leads because the technique was not applicable in 10 PL. Among these, 4952 leads were completely removed (97.6%), 49 (1.0%) partially removed, 75 (1.4%) not removed. Among 4989 exposed leads, 818 were removed by manual traction (16.4%), 3664 by mechanical dilatation using the venous entry site (73.4%), 48 by femoral approach (FA) (1.0%) and 335 by JA (6.7%). All the free-floating leads were completely removed, 25.3% by FA and 74.7% by JA. Major complications occurred in 20 cases (0.72%): cardiac tamponade (19 cases, 4 deaths), hemotorax (1 death). Conclusions Our experience shows that in centers with wide experience, TLR using single sheath mechanical dilatation has a high success rate and a very low incidence of serious complications. TLR through the Internal Jugular Vein increases the effectiveness and safety of the procedure also in case of free-floating or challenging leads. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0839</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0195-668X
ispartof European heart journal, 2020-11, Vol.41 (Supplement_2)
issn 0195-668X
1522-9645
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_ehjci_ehaa946_0839
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)
title Transvenous removal of pacing and ICD leads: single italian referral center experience
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-21T18%3A00%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Transvenous%20removal%20of%20pacing%20and%20ICD%20leads:%20single%20italian%20referral%20center%20experience&rft.jtitle=European%20heart%20journal&rft.au=Segreti,%20L&rft.date=2020-11-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=Supplement_2&rft.issn=0195-668X&rft.eissn=1522-9645&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0839&rft_dat=%3Coup_cross%3E10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0839%3C/oup_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c819-22f7a05d2f6beeb228293006551b291e5d6881021c59035f3e89f646a790ad953%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0839&rfr_iscdi=true