UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Transvenous lead extractions: comparison of laser vs. mechanical approach


Starck, Christoph T; Rodriguez, Hector; Hürlimann, David; Grünenfelder, Jürg; Steffel, Jan; Salzberg, Sacha P; Falk, Volkmar (2013). Transvenous lead extractions: comparison of laser vs. mechanical approach. Europace, 15(11):1636-1641.

Abstract

AIMS: In this retrospective study we compared different lead extraction techniques.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Between January 2009 and December 2012 we performed transvenous lead extraction procedures on 206 leads in 122 patients. Mean implant duration (MID) was 69.6 months (1-384 months). Leads with lead implant duration ≥ 12 months were assigned to groups according to the extraction technique: Group A: no extraction tool; Group B: laser approach; and Group C: mechanical approach. Overall clinical success was 93.3%. Group A showed a significantly lower MID [38.1 (19-122) months] compared with Groups B and C [83.1 (13-168) months; P < 0.0001 vs. 95.4 (12-384) months; P < 0.0001]. Mean implant duration between Groups B and C did not differ significantly (P = 0.28). Clinical and complete procedural success was 100% in Group A. Clinical success rate was higher in Group C than in Group B (97.0 vs. 76.9%, P = 0.018). Complete procedural success did not differ significantly between Groups B and C (88.9 vs. 76.9%; P = 0.132). In Groups B and C, absence of complete procedural success occurred in long implanted leads (MID 107.8 ± 36.4 and 137.6 ± 89.2 months). Relative costs per extracted lead were 49% higher in Group B than in Group C.
CONCLUSION: In case of long implanted leads a laser and a mechanical approach are comparable in complete procedural success and safety. Clinical success and cost effectiveness analysis favours the mechanical approach. Regardless of the extraction technique efficacy and safety optimization has to focus on long implanted leads.

Abstract

AIMS: In this retrospective study we compared different lead extraction techniques.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Between January 2009 and December 2012 we performed transvenous lead extraction procedures on 206 leads in 122 patients. Mean implant duration (MID) was 69.6 months (1-384 months). Leads with lead implant duration ≥ 12 months were assigned to groups according to the extraction technique: Group A: no extraction tool; Group B: laser approach; and Group C: mechanical approach. Overall clinical success was 93.3%. Group A showed a significantly lower MID [38.1 (19-122) months] compared with Groups B and C [83.1 (13-168) months; P < 0.0001 vs. 95.4 (12-384) months; P < 0.0001]. Mean implant duration between Groups B and C did not differ significantly (P = 0.28). Clinical and complete procedural success was 100% in Group A. Clinical success rate was higher in Group C than in Group B (97.0 vs. 76.9%, P = 0.018). Complete procedural success did not differ significantly between Groups B and C (88.9 vs. 76.9%; P = 0.132). In Groups B and C, absence of complete procedural success occurred in long implanted leads (MID 107.8 ± 36.4 and 137.6 ± 89.2 months). Relative costs per extracted lead were 49% higher in Group B than in Group C.
CONCLUSION: In case of long implanted leads a laser and a mechanical approach are comparable in complete procedural success and safety. Clinical success and cost effectiveness analysis favours the mechanical approach. Regardless of the extraction technique efficacy and safety optimization has to focus on long implanted leads.

Citations

10 citations in Web of Science®
12 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:German
Date:2013
Deposited On:10 Feb 2014 15:55
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 17:34
Publisher:Oxford University Press
ISSN:1099-5129
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eut086
PubMed ID:23585255

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations