4.1 Article

Pacemaker and Defibrillator Lead Extraction: Predictors of Mortality during Follow-Up

Journal

PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 33, Issue 2, Pages 209-216

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2009.02601.x

Keywords

pacemaker; defibrillators; lead extraction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Extraction of cardiac implantable electric devices is an accepted procedure when systems become infected or malfunction. However, there is an associated morbidity and mortality. We report our 5-year experience and identify predictors of mortality, and long-term follow-up. Methods: We analyzed extraction data from January 2003 to November 2007. Extraction methods used were: locking stylets, telescoping sheaths +/- laser, and femoral work stations. Results: One hundred and eighty-three cases were referred, aged 65 +/- 16 years (range 28-83); 76% were males. Mean implant time was 75 months (range 4-312 months) and indications were: pocket infection (48%), nonfunctioning lead (22%), erosion through skin (18%), endocarditis/septicemia (11%), bilateral superior vena cava thrombosis (0.5%), and painful lead (0.5%). The number of leads extracted were 369, with complete removal in 90.7% and partial in 7.6%. There were no intraoperative deaths but five (2.7%) died within the same admission as their extraction from overwhelming sepsis. Twelve deaths (6.6%) occurred during an average follow-up of 965 days (range 40-1670). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that C-reactive protein preprocedure was predictive of acute in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: Intravascular lead extraction is a safe and efficient method of removing leads. However, there is a subgroup of patients with systemic sepsis with raised inflammatory markers who are at high risk of in-hospital mortality. Long-term follow-up demonstrates mortality which is a marker of the underlying etiology for device implantation, with heart failure patients particularly at risk. (PACE 2010; 33:209-216).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available