Abstract
AIMS
The decision to abandon or extract superfluous leads remains controversial. We sought to compare procedural outcome of patients with and without abandoned leads undergoing transvenous lead extraction (TLE).
METHODS AND RESULTS
An analysis of the ESC-EHRA European Lead Extraction ConTRolled ELECTRa registry was conducted. Patients were stratified into two groups based on the presence (Group 1) or absence (Group 2) of abandoned leads at the time for extraction. Out of 3508 TLE procedures, 422 patients (12.0%) had abandoned leads (Group 1). Group 1 patients were older and more likely to have implantable cardioverter-defibrillator devices, infection indication (78.8% vs. 49.8%), and vegetations (24.6% vs. 15.3%). Oldest lead dwelling time was longer in Group 1 (10.9 vs. 6.3 years) as was the number of extracted leads per patient (3.2 vs. 1.7). Manual traction failure (94.5% vs. 78.8%), powered sheath use (50.7% vs. 28.4%), and femoral approach were higher in Group 1 (P < 0.0001). Procedural success rate and clinical success (89.8% vs. 96.6%, P < 0.0001) were lower in Group 1. Major complication including deaths (5.5% vs. 2.3%, P = 0.0007) and procedure related major complications (3.3% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.0123) were higher in Group 1. The presence of abandoned leads at the time of TLE was an independent predictor of clinical failure [odds ratio (OR) 2.31, confidence interval (CI) 1.57-3.40] and complications [OR 1.69, CI 1.22-2.35]. receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis showed a dwell time threshold of 9 years for radiological failure and major complications.
CONCLUSIONS
Previously abandoned leads at the time of TLE were associated with increased procedural complexity, clinical failure, and major complication, which may have important implications for future studies regarding managing of lead failures.
Segreti, Luca