Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Does implantation technique influence lead failure?


Holubec, Tomas; Ursprung, Gianluca; Schönrath, Felix; Caliskan, Etem; Steffel, Jan; Falk, Volkmar; Benussi, Stefano; Maisano, Francesco; Starck, Christoph T (2015). Does implantation technique influence lead failure? Acta Cardiologica, 70(5):581-586.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to analyse whether different lead implantation techniques influence lead failure based on implant duration.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Eighty-two transvenous leads were extracted due to lead failure. Median implant duration (MID) of the extracted leads was 68 months. Failed leads were retrospectively divided into 5 subgroups according to predefined technical procedural aspects, potentially triggering lead failure: venous approach, lead disorder in the generator pocket, sharp lead angulation, lead-lead interaction and number of leads in situ. The subgroups were correlated to the MID and compared. The MID was 81 vs 59 months in medial vs lateral venous puncture (P=0.453). In subgroups without/with lead disorder the MID was 59 vs 107 months (P=0.006) and 57 vs 84 months (P=0.012) in subgroups without/with sharp lead angulation, respectively. In subgroups without/with more than 1 lead-lead interaction the MID was 59 vs 81 months (P=0.029) and 65 vs 86 months (P=0.128) without/with more than 2 lead-lead interactions, respectively. In subgroups without/with more than 1 lead in situ the MID was 73 vs 67 months (P=0.453), 81 vs 27 months (P=0.296) in subgroups without/with more than 2 leads in situ and 68 vs 77 months (P=0.264) in subgroups without/with more than 3 leads in situ, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Although, we were able to confirm our hypothesis only partially, technical aspects of lead implantation technique should be kept in mind as a potential reason causing lead failure.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to analyse whether different lead implantation techniques influence lead failure based on implant duration.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Eighty-two transvenous leads were extracted due to lead failure. Median implant duration (MID) of the extracted leads was 68 months. Failed leads were retrospectively divided into 5 subgroups according to predefined technical procedural aspects, potentially triggering lead failure: venous approach, lead disorder in the generator pocket, sharp lead angulation, lead-lead interaction and number of leads in situ. The subgroups were correlated to the MID and compared. The MID was 81 vs 59 months in medial vs lateral venous puncture (P=0.453). In subgroups without/with lead disorder the MID was 59 vs 107 months (P=0.006) and 57 vs 84 months (P=0.012) in subgroups without/with sharp lead angulation, respectively. In subgroups without/with more than 1 lead-lead interaction the MID was 59 vs 81 months (P=0.029) and 65 vs 86 months (P=0.128) without/with more than 2 lead-lead interactions, respectively. In subgroups without/with more than 1 lead in situ the MID was 73 vs 67 months (P=0.453), 81 vs 27 months (P=0.296) in subgroups without/with more than 2 leads in situ and 68 vs 77 months (P=0.264) in subgroups without/with more than 3 leads in situ, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Although, we were able to confirm our hypothesis only partially, technical aspects of lead implantation technique should be kept in mind as a potential reason causing lead failure.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
1 citation in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
3 citations in Microsoft Academic
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 02 Feb 2016
0 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

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:October 2015
Deposited On:02 Feb 2016 14:04
Last Modified:14 Feb 2018 10:48
Publisher:La Societe Belge de Cardiologie
ISSN:0001-5385
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.2143/AC.70.5.3110519
PubMed ID:26567818

Download