Love, Charles J.

AbstractBackgroundAn internal risk stratification algorithm was developed to decrease the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) during lead extractions (LEs).ObjectiveTo report upon the impact of a risk stratification algorithm (RISE [RIsk Stratification prior to lead Extraction] protocol) on outcomes of LEs in a high‐volume center.MethodsA retrospective review of a prospectively maintained LEs database was performed to identify features associated with MACEs. On the basis of the retrospective data, the RISE protocol differentiated LEs procedures into “High” and “Low” risk for occurrence of MACEs. High‐risk LEs included dual‐coil defibrillator lead (≥3 years), pacemaker and single‐coil lead (≥5 years), and any StarFix coronary sinus lead. During the prospective evaluation of the RISE protocol, “High‐risk” LEs were performed in an operating room (OR) or hybrid laboratory with the cardiac anesthesiologist, OR nursing team, perfusionist in the room, and a cardiac surgeon on the premises. “Low‐risk” LEs were performed in the electrophysiology (EP) laboratory with anesthesia provided by EP nursing team. The preintervention (pre‐RISE) and postintervention (post‐RISE) group spanned 19 and 40 months and consisted of 449 (632 leads) and 751 patients (1055 leads), respectively. The primary outcome of MACEs in the two groups was compared.ResultsProtocol compliance was 100%. The primary outcome of MACEs occurred in 15 patients (3.34%) before and 12 (1.6%) after implementation of the RISE protocol (P = .04).ConclusionRISE identified a low‐risk group where minimal resources are needed and allowed for rapid intervention in the high‐risk group that reduced the consequences of MACEs.

Background —In a previous randomized trial, the 12F laser sheath removed pacing leads via the implant vein more successfully than traditional mechanical tools alone. Two larger sizes of laser sheath, the 14F and 16F models, were developed to extract defibrillator leads and large-diameter pacing leads implanted for the chronic. These devices use pulsed ultraviolet laser light to core though fibrotic tissue grown over the lead body to free the lead from the vasculature. A mandatory prospective registry studied the safety and effectiveness profiles of the larger laser sheaths vis-à-vis the 12F laser sheath. Methods and Results —In this study, 863 patients underwent extraction of 1285 leads at 52 sites. Patients treated with the 14F device tended to have older leads than the 12F population; the 16F population, which comprised mostly defibrillator patients, were younger, had younger leads, and were more often male than the 12F population. Clinical success (extracting the entire lead or the lead body minus the distal electrode) was observed in 91% to 92% of cases for all device sizes. The overall complication rate was 3.6%, with 0.8% perioperative mortality. Incidence of complications was independent of laser sheath size. Conclusions —The 14F and 16F laser sheaths offer an extraction option for larger long-term transvenous pacemaker and defibrillator leads that is as safe and effective as the 12F laser sheath.

Background —The Telectronics Accufix pacing leads were recalled in November 1994 after 2 deaths and 2 nonfatal injuries were reported. This multicenter clinical study (MCS) of patients with Accufix leads was designed to determine the rate of spontaneous injury related to the J retention wire and results of lead extraction. Methods and Results —The MCS included 2589 patients with Accufix atrial pacing leads that were implanted at or who were followed up at 12 medical centers. Patients underwent cinefluoroscopic imaging of their lead every 6 months. The risk of J retention wire fracture was ≈5.6%/y at 5 years and 4.7%/y at 10 years after implantation. The annual risk of protrusion was 1.5%. A total of 40 spontaneous injuries were reported to a worldwide registry (WWR) that included data from 34 672 patients (34 892 Accufix leads), including pericardial tamponade (n=19), pericardial effusion (n=5), atrial perforation (n=3), J retention wire embolization (n=4), and death (n=6). The risk of injury was 0.02%/y (95% CI, 0.0025 to 0.072) in the MCS and 0.048%/y (95% CI, 0.035 to 0.067) in the WWR. A total of 5299 leads (13%) have been extracted worldwide. After recall in the WWR, fatal extraction complications occurred in 0.4% of intravascular procedures (16 of 4023), with life-threatening complications in 0.5% (n=21). Extraction complications increased with implant duration, female sex, and J retention wire protrusion. Conclusions —Accufix pacing leads pose a low, ongoing risk of injury. Extraction is associated with substantially higher risks, and a conservative management approach is indicated for most patients.