首页> 外文期刊>Acta Cardiologica >Transvenous extraction of pacing and defibrillator leads - A single-centre experience
【24h】

Transvenous extraction of pacing and defibrillator leads - A single-centre experience

机译:静脉起搏和除颤器导线-单中心体验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Purpose Worldwide, the number of transvenous extractions of chronically implanted endocardial leads rapidly increases. Despite great technical progress, lead extraction remains a challenging procedure with possible life-threatening complications. We present the success and complication rate of lead extractions in the University Hospitals Leuven, and investigated a possible relationship between the use of powered sheaths and lead type, fixation, location and implantation time. Methods We present an observational retrospective cohort study of 157 patients admitted to the University Hospitals Leuven between January 2005 and December 2010, for the transvenous removal of a total of 259 endocardial leads. Results Complete procedural success was achieved in 92% of patients (n = 144). Of all leads, 94% (n = 243) were completely extracted. Only in 5 patients (3%), lead extraction failed. Leads that could not be removed were significantly older (134.1 ± 90.7 months vs. 73.1 ± 61.9 months; P = 0.02). In the other 8 patients the leads were partially removed with a remaining major retained lead fragment in 2 and a minor fragment in 6 patients. Major procedural complication rate was 2.5% (n = 4). There were no procedure-related deaths. Powered sheaths were used significantly more for the extraction of defibrillator leads (51%) (vs. pacing leads (33%; P = 0.015)) and right ventricular located leads (43%) (vs. other location (28%; P = 0.011)). However, when comparing the need of powered sheaths for the extraction of right ventricular defibrillator leads vs. right ventricular pacing leads, only a trend to higher use was noticed (51 vs. 39%; P = 0.146). Powered sheath use was not related to fixation type. Leads that required the use of a powered sheath were implanted significantly longer (112 ± 69.5 months vs. 41.7 ± 33.7 months; P = 0.001). Conclusions Chronically implanted endocardial leads can be transvenously extracted in a high number of cases and with a low risk of procedural complications. Powered sheaths proved to be a helpful tool to extract leads that could not be removed by manual traction. Powered sheaths are necessary for leads with longer implantation duration and are more often used for the extraction of defibrillator leads.
机译:目的在全球范围内,长期植入的心内膜导线的经静脉抽取的数量迅速增加。尽管取得了巨大的技术进步,但是铅的提取仍然是一个具有挑战性的过程,可能会危及生命。我们介绍了鲁汶大学医院铅提取的成功率和并发症发生率,并研究了动力护套的使用与铅类型,固定,位置和植入时间之间的可能关系。方法我们对2005年1月至2010年12月间鲁汶大学医院收治的157例患者进行了一项观察性回顾性队列研究,目的是通过静脉方式清除259条心内膜导联。结果92%的患者(n = 144)获得了完全的手术成功。在所有潜在客户中,有94%(n = 243)被完全提取。仅5例患者(3%)的铅提取失败。无法移除的导线明显更旧(134.1±90.7个月与73.1±61.9个月; P = 0.02)。在其他8例患者中,部分切除了铅,其中2例保留了保留的主要铅段,6例保留了次段。大手术并发症发生率为2.5%(n = 4)。没有与手术相关的死亡。动力鞘被更多地用于除颤器导线的拔除(51%)(与起搏导线(33%; P = 0.015))和右心室定位的导线(43%)(与其他位置的导线(28%; P = 0.011))。但是,在比较动力护套对右心室除颤器导线与右心室起搏导线拔出的需求时,仅注意到使用量增加的趋势(51%vs. 39%; P = 0.146)。动力护套的使用与固定类型无关。需要使用动力护套的引线植入时间明显更长(112±69.5个月vs. 41.7±33.7个月; P = 0.001)。结论长期植入的心内膜导联可以在许多情况下经静脉取出,并且手术并发症的风险较低。事实证明,带动力的护套是提取引线的有用工具,这些引线无法通过手动牵引来移除。动力护套对于植入时间较长的导线必不可少,并且更常用于除纤颤器导线的拔出。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号