BioBrick™ assembly using the In-Fusion PCR Cloning Kit.

S. Sleight,H. Sauro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-625-2_3

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

[Percutaneous extraction of pacemaker and defibrillator leads]

Tomasa Centella,Enrique Oliva,Ignacio García-Andrade,Pilar Martín-Dávila,Javier Cobo,José L Moya,Antonio Hernández-Madrid,Antonio Epeldegui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1157/13107117

Abstract:Introduction and objectives: There is an increasing need for endocardial pacing and defibrillators leads to be removed. However, the procedure can be complex and it is not risk-free. We reviewed our experience between April 1989 and June 2006 with the percutaneous extraction of leads. Methods: In total, 314 electrodes were extracted from 187 patients. The leads had been implanted over an average period of 69.16 months (range 0.11-234.6 months, median 60.25 months). Some 115 were atrial leads, 196 were ventricular, and three were in the coronary veins; of these, 78 had been abandoned in the vascular bed. Results: Indications for removal were infection (26.1%), dysfunction (22.9%), erosion (25%), endocarditis (20.7%), and bacteremia (2.7%). Overall, 58.8% of patients were referred from other departments. In 96.8%, the electrodes were completely removed. Simple traction was used in 23.4%, and countertraction techniques (with and without radiofrequency current support) were used in 60.7%. For abandoned leads, a biopsy clamp was used in combination with countertraction (4.3%) or a femoral approach with a snare (10.1%). A sternotomy was required in three of the 10 patients with remaining electrode fragments. The complication rate was 4.6% (with major complications in 2.5%). Complications were associated with age < 60 years (odds ratio [OR]=5.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-27.23), the presence of endocarditis (OR=4.97: 95%CI, 1.04-23.70), and right side implantation (OR=17.09; 95% CI, 2.15-135.70). Conclusions: In the majority of cases, pacing and defibrillator leads can be removed without difficulty using modern extraction techniques. However, because there is a risk of complications during extraction, even though it is low, the procedure should be carried out in specialized centers with surgical facilities.
The Feasibility and Safety of Endomyocardial Biopsy by Lumenless Pacing Lead-Sheath Directed Method During the Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Implantation

Yang Ye,Youyou Chen,Hao Jiang,Jiling Zeng,Xingchen Wang,Ying Yang,Xiang Lan Liu,XuLin Hong,Bei Wang,Ya Xun Sun,Dongwu Lai,Xi-qi Xu,Guo-sheng Fu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.11.018

IF: 6.779

2024-01-01

Heart Rhythm

Abstract:Background Patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) indication are complicated with special cardiomyopathy or other unspecified cardiac abnormalities and may need endomyocardial biopsy (EMB). However, EMB by a bioptome is usually avoided to reduce the risk of lead displacement in the CIED peri-procedural period. Objective We aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of a novel approach for transvenous right ventricular (RV) EMB using the lead-sheath method (L-S-M) during CIED implantation and compared it to the traditional bioptome method (T-B-M). Methods Consecutive eighty patients referred for EMB were enrolled. In the L-S-M group, a sheath with a lumenless pacing lead was positioned toward the middle to apical interventricular septum under fluoroscopy (n=60). The CIED implantation was performed through the same venous access site. In the T-B-M group, a bioptome was used (n=20). The clinical characteristics, procedural details, success rate and complications were evaluated. Results 380 RV EMBs procedures were performed with comparable 4.1±0.8 in the L-S-M group and 3.8±0.8 samples/patient in the T-B-M group. In the L-S-M group, seven (11.7%) patients experienced minor complications with 3 transient right bundle branch block, 2 transient atrioventricular block (AVB) and 2 regional minor device pocket hematomas. In the T-B-M group, three (15%) experienced one temporary pacing for transient AVB, one chest discomfort and one regional hematoma. No cardiac tamponade was detected. Conclusions RV EMB by the innovative L-S-M method is technically feasible, safe and can yield valuable and early diagnostic insights for patients who are candidates for CIEDs.
Re-evaluation of Transvenous Lead Extraction with Modified Standard Technique: a Prospective Study in 229 Patients.

Xian-ming Chu,Xue-bin Li,Ping Zhang,Long Wang,Ding Li,Jiang-bo Duan,Bing Li,Ji-hong Guo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-013-1175-y

2013-01-01

Abstract:As new-type powered sheaths are expensive and unavailable, the standard lead extraction techniques remain the mainstay in clinical applications in many countries. The purpose of this study was to re-evaluate the clinical application of the standard lead extraction techniques and equipment, and make some procedural modifications and innovations. In our center, between January 2006 and May 2012, 229 patients (median, 66 years) who underwent lead extraction due to infection and lead malfunction were registered and followed up prospectively with respect to clinical features, reasons for lead extraction, technical characteristics, and clinical prognosis. A total of 440 leads had to be extracted transvenously by using special tools from 229 patients (male, 72.1%). Vegetations ≥1 cm were detected in six patients. Locking Stylets were applied for 398 (90.5%) leads. Telescoping dilator polypropylene sheaths and counter traction technique were used for 202 (45.9%) leads due to lead adhesion, and the mean implant duration of the 202 leads was longer than the other 238 leads (48.9±22.6 vs. 26.6±17.8 months; P <0.01). In addition, modified isolation and snare techniques were used for 56 leads (12.7%). Minor and major procedure-related complications occurred in three (1.3%) and four (1.7%) cases respectively, including one death (0.4%). Severe lead residue occurred in one case. Complete procedural success rate was 96.1% (423/440), and clinical success rate was 98.9% (435/440). The median follow-up period was 18 (1–76) months. No infection- and procedure-related death occurred in our series. Our data demonstrated that high clinical success rate of transvenous lead extraction can be guaranteed by making full use of the standard lead extraction techniques and equipment with individualized modifications.
Investigations on the outbreak of dengue fever in Ajmer City, Rajasthan in 1969. Part II: Result of serological tests.

S. N. Ghosh,B. Sheikh

The Indian Journal of Medical Research

Abstract:
Comparison of outcomes and required tools between transvenous extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: Insight from single high‐volume center experience

Katsuhide Hayashi,Thomas Callahan,John Rickard,Bryan Baranowski,David O. Martin,Shady Nakhla,Chadi Tabaja,Aritra Paul,Bruce L. Wilkoff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.16294

IF: 2.7

2024-05-10

Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology

Abstract:Introduction Reports of comparison with procedural outcomes for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and pacemaker (PM) transvenous lead extraction (TLE) are old and limited. We sought to compare the safety, efficacy, and procedural properties of ICD and PM TLE and assess the impact of lead age. Methods The study cohort included all consecutive patients with ICD and PM TLE in the Cleveland Clinic Prospective TLE Registry between 2013 and 2022. Extraction success, complications, and failure employed the definitions described in the HRS 2017 TLE guidelines. Results A total of 885 ICD leads, a median implant duration of 8 (5−11) years in 810 patients, and 1352 PM leads of 7 (3−13) years in 807 patients were included. Procedural success rates in ICD patients were superior to those of PM in >20 years leads but similar in ≤20 years leads. In the PM group, the complete success rate of TLE decreased significantly according to the increase of lead age, but not in the ICD group. ICD TLE required more extraction tools compared with PM TLE but cases with older leads required non‐laser sheath extraction tools in both groups. The most common injury site in major complication cases differed between ICD and PM TLE, although major complication rates showed no difference in both groups (2.7% vs. 1.6%, p = .12). Conclusion The procedural success rate by TLE is greater for ICD patients than PM patients with leads >20 years old but requires more extraction tools. Common vascular complication sites and the impact of lead age on procedural outcomes and required tools differed between ICD and PM TLE.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Lysosomal localization of sphingomyelinase in rat liver.

S. Fowler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2744(69)90271-X

1969-11-04

Biochimica et Biophysica Acta

Abstract:
Transvenous extraction of conduction system and lumenless pacing leads

Ethan S. Wagner,Robert K. Lewis,Sean D. Pokorney,Donald D. Hegland,Daniel J. Friedman,Jonathan P. Piccini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.16467

IF: 2.7

2024-10-17

Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology

Abstract:Extraction of CSP and non‐CSP lumenless leads is feasible with a high success rate and a good safety profile. CSP reimplantation after extraction is also feasible with good electrical performance. Introduction Conduction system pacing (CSP), often accomplished with lumenless pacing leads, is increasingly employed to achieve physiologic ventricular activation. There are limited data on the extraction of these leads. The objective of this study was to describe the safety and efficacy of extraction of CSP pacing leads and compare outcomes with extraction of non‐CSP lumenless leads. Methods Patients undergoing CSP/non‐CSP lumenless lead removal were included. Outcomes of interest included rates of complete procedural success, complications, and successful reimplantation. Results Overall, 23 patients were included (n = 14 with CSP and n = 9 with non‐CSP lumenless leads implanted in the right atrium, right ventricle, or septum). The mean age was 52.7 ± 24.0 years, 30% were female, and the mean lead age was 4.5 ± 4.4 years. The complete procedural success rate was 100%. One serious complication occurred in the non‐CSP group but was unrelated to the lead of interest. Manual traction alone was successful in 57% of CSP cases (mean lead age 2.4 ± 1.7 years) and in 11% of non‐CSP cases (mean lead age 7.9 ± 5.3 years). Laser sheaths were used in 43% of CSP cases and 89% of non‐CSP cases; rotational cutting tools were used in no CSP cases and in 33% of non‐CSP cases. Reimplantation in the conduction system was attempted with a left bundle branch pacing lead and successful in 80% (n = 4/5). Conclusion Extraction of CSP and non‐CSP lumenless leads is feasible with a high success rate and a good safety profile. CSP reimplantation after extraction is also feasible with good electrical performance.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Percutaneous pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead extraction in patients with intracardiac vegetations

DUAN Jiang-bo,LI Xue-bin,WANG Long,LI Ding,ZHANG Ping,CHU Xian-ming,YUAN Cui-zhen,GUO Ji-hong

2013-01-01

Abstract:Objective To explore the feasibility,safety,and clinical outcomes of percutaneous lead extraction in patients who had intracardiac vegetations.Methods We analyzed percutaneous lead extractions performed from January 1995 to August 2011 in infected patients with echocardiographic evidence of intracardiac vegetations,followed by a descriptive analysis.Results A total of 152 patients underwent extraction leads,6 patients had intracardiac vegetations identified by transthoracic echocardiogram,and all underwent percutaneous lead extraction(16 leads).No deaths were related directly to the extraction procedure.Conclusions Patients with intracardiac vegetations identified on transthoracic echocardiogram can safely undergo complete device extraction using percutaneous lead extraction techniques.
Transfemoral Extraction of Pacemaker and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Leads Using Needle’s Eye Snare: a Single-Center Experience of More Than 900 Leads

Xu Zhou,Feng Ze,Ding Li,Long Wang,Jiangbo Duan,Cuizhen Yuan,Jinshan He,Jihong Guo,Xuebin Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-019-01539-2

2019-01-01

Heart and Vessels

Abstract:The femoral approach with the Needle’s Eye Snare (NES) is often used for bailout after failure of the superior approach for transvenous lead extraction (TLE). The safety and efficacy of the NES as a first-line tool for TLE remain unclear. The medical records of patients who underwent TLE via the femoral approach utilizing the NES from May 2014 to June 2019 in Peking University People’s Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Nine hundred and eighty-five leads were extracted in 492 patients (369 men; mean age 72.8 ± 29.0 years). The median (range) number of leads extracted per patient was 2 (1–6). The mean indwelling time of all extracted leads was 112.6 ± 52.0 months. The complete procedure success rate, clinical success rate, and failure rate were 94.1% (463/492), 97.8% (481/492), and 1.1% (11/492), respectively. Major complications including death occurred in nine patients (1.9%), of whom eight developed cardiac tamponade. Among these eight patients, emergency pericardiocentesis followed by rescue surgical repair if necessary was successful in 6 (75.0%) and failed in 2 (25.0%). No significant differences were found in the clinical success rate or major complications rate between patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators, or between patients with infected and uninfected leads. A femoral approach with the NES is safe and effective for TLE of both pacing and defibrillator leads and could be considered a first-line approach. Cardiac tamponade was the most frequent cardiovascular complication. A strategy of emergency pericardiocentesis followed by a rescue surgical approach seems to be reasonable technique to treat a cardiac tamponade.
A Large Single-Center Clinical Trial of Transvenous Lead Extraction

李学斌,王龙,李鼎,刘刚,段江波,昃峰,田轶伦,郭飞,苑翠珍

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-6638.2015.04.002

2015-01-01

Abstract:Objective Transveneous lead extraction is the basic therapy in the management of cardiovascular implantable electrical device (CIED) infection.In this report,we presented our initial experience in transvenous lead extraction and the method of tools-choosing.Methods From January 2007 to March 2014,the study was divided into two periods:period one (January 2007-Maych 2013),period two (June 2013-December 2014).1 032 leads in 501 patients were removed.The indications for extraction were based on the recommendations of the heart rhythm society.The success rate,complication,lead types and special tools,etc were compared.Results During the period one(Jan 2007-May 2013),509 leads in 252 patients were removed,in which atrial lead 189(37.1％),right ventricular lead 272(53.4％),left ventricular lead 24(4.7％),defibrillator coil 24(4.7％).Implantation duration was 27 (0.3-360.0)months,Success rate 98.9％,major complication in 6 cases,2 death (1.7％).During the period two(June 2013-December 2014),523 leads in 249 patients were extracted,in which atrial leads 201(38.4％),right ventricular leads 240(45.9％),left ventricular leads 35(6.7％),defibrillator coils 47(9.0％).Implantation duration was 38 (0.4-490.0)months.Success rate was 100％,major complication in 1 case,0 deaths.In period two,77 leads were extracted by Evolution mechanical dilator sheath(Cook Medical),major complication 1 case(1.3％).Four hundreds leads were extracted by Needle's Eye Snare(Cook Medical),major complication in 1 case (0.25％).Conclusion The transvenoues lead extraction is effective in management of CIED infection.It companied the risk of major complication.The reasonable tools-choosing will increase the safety and efficacy.Needle Eye Snare could be the primary choice in lead extraction.
Percutaneous Extraction of Leads from Coronary Sinus Vein and Branch by Modified Techniques.

Chu Xian-ming,Li Xue-bin,Zhang Ping,Wang Long,Li Ding,Li Bing,An Yi,Leng Min,Duan Jiang-bo,Guo Ji-hong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.2012.20.020

2012-01-01

Abstract:Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device and coronary sinus (CS) lead extraction are required due to the occurrence of systemic infection, malfunction, or upgrade. Relevant research of CS lead extraction is rare, especially in developing countries because of the high cost and lack of specialized tools. We aimed to evaluate percutaneous extraction of CS leads by modified conventional techniques.Methods Of 200 patients referred for lead extraction from January 2007 to June 2011, 24 (12.0%) involved CS leads (24 CS leads). We prospectively analyzed clinical characteristics, optimized extraction techniques and feasibility of extraction.Results Complete procedural success was achieved in 23 patients (95.8%), and the clinical success in 24 patients (100.0%). The leading indication for CS lead extraction was infection (66.7%). Mean implant duration was (29.5 +/- 20.2) months (range, 3-78 months). Sixteen CS leads (66.6%) were removed with locking stylets plus manual traction by superior transvenous approach. Mechanical dilatation and counter-traction was required to free fibrotic adhesions and extract 4 CS leads (16.7%), which had longer implant duration than other leads ((62.5 +/- 12.3) vs. (22.9 +/- 14.1) months, P<0.05). Another 4 CS (16.7%) leads were removed by modified and innovative snare techniques from femoral vein approach. Median extraction time was 11 minutes (range, 3-61 minutes) per CS lead, which had significant correlation with implant duration (r = 0.8, P<0.001). Sixteen patients (66.6%) were reimplanted with new devices at a median of 7.5 days after extraction. Median followed-up was 23.5 months (range, 8-61 months), three patients died due to sudden cardiac death (26 months), heart failure (45 and 57 months, respectively).Conclusion The modified procedure was proved to be practical for percutaneous extraction of CS leads, especially in developing countries lacking expensive powered sheaths. Chin Med J 2012;125(20):3707-3711
Implantable Defibrillator Lead Extraction with Optimized Standard Extraction Techniques

Xian-Ming Chu,Xue-Bin Li,Ping Zhang,Yi An,Jiang-Bo Duan,Long Wang,Ding Li,Bing Li,Ji-Hong Guo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2012-302920n.7

IF: 5.7

2012-01-01

Heart

Abstract:Background Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads might not be extracted especially in developing countries because of the high cost and lack of specialized tools. We aimed to evaluate transvenous extraction of ICD leads using optimized standard techniques. Methods We prospectively analyzed clinical characteristics, optimized extraction techniques and the feasibility of extraction for 40 patients (33 males; mean age 47.9 +/- 16.1 years) with 42 ICD leads. Results Complete procedural success rate was 95.2% (40/42), and the clinical success rate was 97.6% (41/42). One ICD lead required cardiothoracic surgery. Minor complications occurred in three cases (7.5%), and no major complications or death occurred. Locking stylets were used to extract most leads (34, 81.0%) and almost half of the leads (20, 47.6%) required mechanical dilatation to free fibrotic adhesions; these leads had been implanted for a longer period of time than the others (43.7 +/- 18.2 vs. 18.4 +/- 13.4 months, P < 0.05). Three-quarters of the leads (30, 71.4%) were extracted with locking stylets plus manual traction (12, 28.6%), or mechanical dilatation with counter-traction (18, 42.8%) by the superior vena cava approach and one-quarter of the leads (11, 26.2%) were removed by optimized snare techniques using the femoral vein approach. Median extraction time was 20 min (range 2-68 min) per lead. Linear regression analysis showed that the extraction time was significantly correlated with implant duration (r = 0.70, P < 0.001). Median follow-up was 14.5 months (range 1-58 months), no infection, or procedure-related death occurred in our series. Conclusions Our optimized procedure for transvenous extraction of ICD leads provides a practical and low-cost method for standard procedures. J Geriatr Cardiol 2013; 10: 3-9. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1263.2012.08211
Aberrant left subclavian artery aneurysm with esophago-arterial fistula. CT demonstration.

D. Warshauer,T. P. Walters,F. Detterbeck

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0899-7071(93)90070-4

IF: 2.42

1993-10-01

Clinical Imaging

Abstract:
Inverted T wave returning to upright during acute MI.

E. Hancock

Hospital Practice

Abstract:
Practical Approaches to Transvenous Lead Extraction Procedures-Clinical Case Series

Paul-Mihai Boarescu,Iulia Diana Popa,Cătălin Aurelian Trifan,Adela Nicoleta Roşian,Ştefan Horia Roşian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010379

2022-12-26

Abstract:Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is regarded as the first-line strategy for the management of complications associated with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), when lead removal is mandatory. The decision to perform a lead extraction should take into consideration not only the strength of the clinical indication for the procedure but also many other factors such as risks versus benefits, extractor and team experience, and even patient preference. TLE is a procedure with a possible high risk of complications. In this paper, we present three clinical cases of patients who presented different indications of TLE and explain how the procedures were successfully performed. In the first clinical case, TLE was necessary because of device extravasation and suspicion of CIED pocket infection. In the second clinical case, TLE was necessary because occlusion of the left subclavian vein was found when an upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy was performed. In the last clinical case, TLE was necessary in order to remove magnetic resonance (MR) non-conditional leads, so the patient could undergo an MRI examination for the management of a brain tumor.
Outcomes of Transvenous Lead Extraction in Patients with Lead Perforation: A Single‐center Experience

Xu Zhou,Feng Ze,Ding Li,Long Wang,Jihong Guo,Xuebin Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.23327

2020-01-01

Clinical Cardiology

Abstract:Background Management of cardiac perforation caused by the lead of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) is currently unclear. This study evaluated the outcomes of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in patients with cardiac perforation caused by a transvenous lead. Hypothesis Removal of perforated lead by transvenous approach is safe and effective. Methods The medical records of all patients diagnosed with cardiac perforation by a pacing or defibrillator lead in Peking University People's Hospital from January 2008 to January 2019 were reviewed. We included patients who were managed by TLE. Results A total of 53 patients (30 men; mean age: 67 +/- 15 years) with lead perforation managed by TLE were included. Most of the perforated leads (94.9%) were pacemaker leads. Forty-three leads (81.1%) were implanted within 1 year. Ten patients with a high risk of hemopericardium underwent percutaneous subxiphoid pericardial puncture prior to TLE. All 53 culprit leads were removed completely without major complications. Simple traction with or without a locking stylet was sufficient in 51 patients (96.2%). Forty-eight patients (90.6%) had a new active-fixation lead reimplanted. No patients showed evidence of new-onset or worsening pericardial effusion during the procedure and hospital stay. During a median follow-up time of 16 months, no recurrence of symptoms associated with lead perforation or CIED-related infection were reported. Conclusion In most patients with lead perforation, TLE can be a safe and effective management approach.
Traditional and Non-traditional Lead Extraction Techniques

Gordon Ho,Ulrika Birgersdotter-Green,Travis Pollema

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccep.2024.06.005

Abstract:With increasing volume of cardiac implantable electronic devices in the last decade, the indications for device extraction have increased. Multidisciplinary collaboration between cardiothoracic surgeons, cardiac anesthesiologists, and cardiac electrophysiologists has been recognized as an essential pre-requisite in pre-procedural planning to limit complications from this inherently risky procedure. Fortunately, the tools and techniques have continued to evolve to make extraction safer and more effective. This article discusses traditional and non-traditional techniques for transvenous lead extraction in addition to retrieval of leadless pacemakers.
A Rare Phenomenon among 3847 Lead Extraction Procedures

Andrzej Kutarski,Wojciech Jacheć,Radosław Pietura,Paweł Stefańczyk,Jarosław Kosior,Marek Czajkowski,Sebastian Sawonik,Łukasz Tułecki,Dorota Nowosielecka

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13092602

IF: 3.9

2024-04-30

Journal of Clinical Medicine

Abstract:Background: The study aimed to describe the phenomenon of leads migrated (MPLE) into the cardiovascular system (CVS). Methods: Retrospective analysis of 3847 transvenous lead extractions (TLE). Results: Over a 17-year period, 72 (1.87%) MPLEs (median dwell time 137.5 months) were extracted, which included mainly ventricular leads (56.94%). Overall, 68.06% of MPLEs had their cut proximal ends in the venous system. Most of them were pacing (95.83%) and passive fixation (98.61%) leads. Independent risk factors for MPLE included abandoned leads (OR = 8.473; p < 0.001) and leads located on both sides of the chest (2.981; p = 0.045). The higher NYHA class lowered the probability of MPLE (OR = 0.380; p < 0.001). Procedure complexity was higher in the MPLE group (procedure duration, unexpected procedure difficulties, use of additional (advanced) tools and alternative venous approach). There were no more major complications in the MPLE group, but the rate of procedural success was lower due to more frequent retention of non-removable lead fragments. Extraction of MPLEs did not influence long-term survival. Conclusions: 1. Extraction of leads with MPLE is rare among other TLE procedures (1.9%), 2. risk factors include abandoned leads and presence of leads on both sides of the chest but a higher NYHA class lowers the probability of MPLE, 3. complexity of MPLE extraction is higher regarding procedure duration, unexpected procedure difficulties, use of advanced tools and techniques but rates of major complications are comparable, and 4. extraction of MPLEs did not influence long-term survival.

medicine, general & internal
Hospital-based emergency contraception.

B. Wagner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/AJHP/61.17.1771

2004-09-01

American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

Abstract:
Preliminary Clinical Experience of Transveneous Extraction in Patients with Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection

Yu Hongsong,Li Xiaohong,Ji Wenqing,Xu Wei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-6638.2015.04.003

2015-01-01

Abstract:Objective To summarize our clinical experience in transvenous lead extraction.Methods From Jan 2010 to Dec 2014,patients hospitalized in Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital with cardiovasicular implantable electrical device(CIED) infection were enrolled.Transvenous lead extraction were performed to compare clinical effects of different tools.Results A total of 187 patients were enrolled and 318 leads were removed.Averaged implantation duration was (82.0±26.4) months.After bacteriological examination,Pocket local infection in 142 cases,blood infection in 33 cases and infective endocarditis in 12 cases were confirmed.locking stylet、mechanical sheaths、Evolution mechanical dilator sheath and snare were used during operation.Three hundred and nine leads were removed successfully.Major complication in 6 cases,including pericardial tamponade,pulmonary embolism,pneumothorax and serious ventricular arrhythmia.No patientdied.Reimplantation were performed in 171 patients,168 cases in contralateral side.Conclusion The transvenoues lead extraction is effective in management of CIED infection.Reasonable tools choosing will increase the safety and efficacy.

BioBrick™ assembly using the In-Fusion PCR Cloning Kit.

[Percutaneous extraction of pacemaker and defibrillator leads]

The Feasibility and Safety of Endomyocardial Biopsy by Lumenless Pacing Lead-Sheath Directed Method During the Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Implantation

Re-evaluation of Transvenous Lead Extraction with Modified Standard Technique: a Prospective Study in 229 Patients.

Investigations on the outbreak of dengue fever in Ajmer City, Rajasthan in 1969. Part II: Result of serological tests.

Comparison of outcomes and required tools between transvenous extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: Insight from single high‐volume center experience

Lysosomal localization of sphingomyelinase in rat liver.

Transvenous extraction of conduction system and lumenless pacing leads

Percutaneous pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead extraction in patients with intracardiac vegetations

Transfemoral Extraction of Pacemaker and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Leads Using Needle’s Eye Snare: a Single-Center Experience of More Than 900 Leads

A Large Single-Center Clinical Trial of Transvenous Lead Extraction

Percutaneous Extraction of Leads from Coronary Sinus Vein and Branch by Modified Techniques.

Implantable Defibrillator Lead Extraction with Optimized Standard Extraction Techniques

Aberrant left subclavian artery aneurysm with esophago-arterial fistula. CT demonstration.

Inverted T wave returning to upright during acute MI.

Practical Approaches to Transvenous Lead Extraction Procedures-Clinical Case Series

Outcomes of Transvenous Lead Extraction in Patients with Lead Perforation: A Single‐center Experience

Traditional and Non-traditional Lead Extraction Techniques

A Rare Phenomenon among 3847 Lead Extraction Procedures

Hospital-based emergency contraception.

Preliminary Clinical Experience of Transveneous Extraction in Patients with Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection