Early abrasion of outer silicone insulation after intracardiac lead friction in a patient with cardiac device-related infective endocarditis

We present a case of a 76-year-old woman on a permanent pacing device, with early abrasion of silicone endocardial lead insulations complicated by lead-dependent infective endocarditis 13 months after placement of an implantable pulse generator. The leads were removed using transvenous technique with direct traction, and with no additional tools. In the previous report, a set of additional tools was used, and therefore intraoperative endocardial lead abrasions or mechanical damage of leads could have not been excluded. The present case undoubtedly proves that the friction of leads against each other may result in abrasions of insulation of the intracardiac section of the lead.     

Surgical removal of entrapped endocardial leads without using extracorporeal circulation

Of 267 patients having a tined endocardial lead implanted from 1978 to December 1983, three (1.1%) developed pulse generator pocket infection. Proper treatment of this complication involves removal of the pulse generator, continued external pacing via the implanted lead, pocket drainage and administration of specific antibiotics until the infected area clears. In two patients, the electrode could not be removed by traction. A sternotomy was performed, the pericardium was opened, the endocardial electrode was located by palpation, and a purse string suture (PSS) was prepared around it on the right ventricular wall. A new myocardial electrode with its corresponding generator was then implanted to reestablish pacing. Through the PSS the myocardium was incised, the distal end of the endocardial lead was exteriorized and severed, and the PSS was tied. The remaining lead was withdrawn proximally and the surgical wounds were closed. The results of this procedure have been been excellent, allowing the removal of the entrapped leads, with continuous pacing and without the need for extracorporeal circulation.     

Stiffness of the Distal Tip of Bipolar Pacing Leads

CAMERON, J., ET AL.: Stiffness of the Distal Tip of Bipolar Pacing Leads. The stiffness of a bipolar pacing lead, particularly between anode and cathode, may be responsible for myocardial penetration and perforation. Following an unprecedented 7% incidence of high threshold exit block with a single model bipolar ventricular endocardial lead, a study was undertaken to compare pacing lead stiffness between anode and cathode of six models of bipolar leads from two manufacturers; Telectronics (T) and Medtronics (M). Four leads had polyurethane insulation; T 030–284 (Laser Dish), T 329–259 (Cordis, Encor), M4012 (Target Tip), and M 4004 (Capsure). Two leads had silicone rubber insulation; M 5026 (Capsure) and M 5024 (Capsure SP). All leads were subjected to two stiffness tests. The Tip Deflection Test involved securing the lead at 45° at the indifferent electrode and applying a force to deflect the tip 5 mm. The three point bending test involved placing the lead over two fixed bars in contact with the anode and cathode. Midway a third bar was pushed onto the lead and the force to deflect the lead 2 mm was recorded. The results showed that pacing leads with polyurethane insulation were much stiffer than those with silicone rubber insulation. The T 030–284 because of its construction was found to be the stiffest. The next stiffest was the M 4012. Both these leads had an unacceptable incidence of high threshold exit block; 7% with the T 030–284 (89 implants) and 3% with the M 4012 (102 implants). No cases of high threshold exit block were documented with the other four pacing leads and in particular the silicone rubber M 5026 (344 implants). It is recommended that bipolar pacing leads with low stiffness between anode and cathode be used and that all new pacing leads be tested for stiffness prior to human implants.     

Achieving Permanent Left Ventricular Pacing—Options and Choice

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) requires permanent left ventricular (LV) pacing. Coronary sinus (CS) lead placement is the first line clinical approach but can be difficult or impossible; may suffer from a high LV pacing threshold, phrenic nerve stimulation, and dislodgement; and produces epicardial LV pacing, which is less physiological and hemodynamically effective and potentially more proarrhythmic than endocardial LV pacing. CS leads can usually be extracted with direct traction but may require use of extraction sheaths. Half of CS side branches previously used for lead placement may be unusable for the same purpose after successful lead extraction, and 30% of CS lead reimplantation attempts may fail due to exhaustion of side branches. Surgical epicardial LV lead placement is the more invasive second line approach, produces epicardial LV pacing, and has a lead failure rate of ≈15% in 5 years. Transseptal endocardial LV lead placement is the third line approach, can be difficult to achieve, but produces endocardial LV pacing. The major concern with transseptal endocardial LV leads is systemic thromboembolism, but the risk is unknown and oral anticoagulation is advised. Among the new CRT recipients in the United States and Western Europe between 2003 and 2007, 22,798 patients may require CS lead revisions, 9,119 patients may have no usable side branches for CS lead replacement, and 1,800 patients may require surgical epicardial LV lead revision in the next 5 years. The CRT community should actively explore and develop alternative approaches to LV pacing to meet this anticipated clinical demand.     

Extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: patient and lead characteristics in relation to the requirement of extraction tools

Effective tools for extraction of pacemaker and ICD leads have been developed in the past decennium. This study investigated the necessity of using these tools in addition to direct traction in relation to patient and lead characteristics. The study encompasses first attempts at extraction of consecutive pacemaker and ICD leads from the subpectoral area. A stepwise extraction protocol was used with traction first (directly or with a locking stylet) followed by laser sheath extraction if not successful. The indication, patient age, time from implant, fixation mechanism, location, and insertion site of the leads were studied in relation to the outcome of traction. A total of 145 leads in 83 patients were extracted. Leads were implanted for 71 +/- 61 months. Indication for extraction was infection in 96 leads and malfunction in 49 leads. There were 90 ventricular leads including 16 ICD leads. Forty-nine (34%) leads were extracted with traction; in 96 (66%) leads a laser sheath was necessary. All leads implanted for < 6 months could be removed with traction alone. In a multivariate logistic regression model, time from implant was the main factor determining success of traction (P < 0.001), but in case of infection the success rate increased (P = 0.004). In conclusion, time from implant is the decisive factor to judge the potential efficacy of lead extraction with direct traction. If leads are implanted for 6 months, the availability of additional extraction tools is necessary when lead extraction is considered. In addition to time from implant, infected leads have a better chance to be removed with traction although it is a much weaker predictor.     

The Dotter Retriever and Pigtail Catheter: Efficacy in Extraction of Chronic Transvenous Pacemaker Leads

Several techniques exist for percutaneous extraction of chronic pacemaker leads. To establish the efficacy of the Dotter retriever and pigtail catheter, we reviewed the removal of 59 endocardial pacemaker leads in 42 patients (mean age 71 years). The mean duration of lead implantation was 44 months (range 1–169 months). Thirty-two leads were withdrawn with simple traction alone, and five leads were abandoned when traction failed. The remaining 22 leads were manipulated with a Dotter retriever or pigtail catheter, or both. Twelve leads were dislodged from the endocardium with simple traction (10)or with traction transmitted through an entwining pigtail catheter (2), but they could not be fully withdraivn. Eleven of these leads (92%)were then successfully extracted with the Dotter retriever. Seven of the remaining 10 leads were successfully disJodged and removed by the Dotter retriever. Overall, 9 of 12 leads (75%)that could not be dislodged from the endocardium with simple traction were removed with a Dotter retriever or pigtail catheter, or both. Three patients in whom no catheter method worked required thoracotomy for removal of infected leads. No complications resulted from use of the Dotter retriever or pigtail catheter. We conclude that the Dotter retriever and pigtail catheter have moderate efficacy for dislodging chronic endocardial leads. Once mobilized, however, the leads can be withdrawn with great success with the Dotter retriever. Newer technology should not result in the abandonment of this proven technique.     

Migration and infection of a pace-sense lead from an abdominal defibrillator system

A 47-year-old man had an ICD system with epicardial and endocardial components and an abdominal generator placed in 1990 following a cardiac arrest. Ten years later his BT10 lead was amputated due to an insulation defect, and he received a new pectoral generator with transvenous leads. A few months later he developed fevers, chills, and bacteremia. Evaluation demonstrated migration of the entire BT10 lead into the right atrium. Complete surgical explantation was required and the bacteremia resolved. This case illustrates the importance of solid anchoring of distal lead components following generator removal and the potential complication of intravascular lead migration.     

Pacemaker lead extraction with the needle's eye snare for countertraction via a femoral approach

Femoral approach pacemaker lead extraction is described as a safe and efficacious procedure. When the lead can not be removed from its myocardial insertion, the "Needle's eye snare" has become available, and it allows a femoral approach traction associated with a countertraction. Between May 1998 and May 2000, 222 lead extraction procedures were performed in 99 patients using the femoral approach. This article reports the results of the 70 lead extractions requiring the use of the Needle's eye snare for femoral approach countertraction in 39 patients with a total of 82 leads. The indications were infection, accufix leads and lead dysfunction in 56, 1 and 6 leads, respectively. The age of the leads was 113 +/- 56 months. Sixty-one (87.2%) leads were successfully extracted, the extraction was incomplete in 3 (4.3%) cases and failed in 6 (8.5%) cases. The failures were due to leads totally excluded from the venous flow for four leads, the impossibility of advancing the 16 Fr long sheath through the right and left iliac veins for one lead and one traction induced a nontolerated ventricular arrhythmia. In these cases, an extraction by a simple upper traction had been attempted in another center several months before. The complications included two deaths and one transient ischemia of the right inferior limb. Despite the selection of a series of leads for which an extraction by a simple traction on the proximal end of the lead was impossible or unsuccessful, femoral countertraction seems to be a safe and efficacious procedure. The failure of this technique occurred in patients with damaged leads due to a previous extraction procedure performed in centers with limited experience in lead extraction.     

Three-Year Experience with a Stylet for Lead Extraction: A Multicenter Study

The extraction of chronically implanted and infected pacemaker and defibrillator leads is an important issue. This article describes the experience gathered between 1990 and 1994 by seven European centers regarding a locking stylet that is uniformly applicable for a wide variety of internal pacing coil diameters. This interventional locking stylet for lead extraction has an outer diameter of 0.4 mm (0.016 inches). The stylet consists of a hollow shaft in which an inner traction wire is embedded. At the tip of the inner traction wire an anchoring mechanism, which can be opened by retraction, is applied. Removal attempts were made for 150 leads, 110 in ventricular and 40 in atrial positions. Results : Complete removal was possible in 122 cases (81 %). Partial removal was possible in 18 cases (12%). Failure to remove the lead with the extraction stylet was experienced in 10 cases (7%). In seven patients, the leads were removed by cardiothoracic surgery; 3 defective leads were left in place. There were no serious complications associated with the procedure. None of the patients died. Conclusion : The experience with this extraction stylet for lead removal has shown good results. Despite a low complication rate thus far, each case for lead removal should be judged on the individual basis of benefit-to-risk ratio.     

Oversensing in a Cardioverter Defibrillator System Caused by Interaction Between Two Endocardial Defibrillation Leads in the Right Ventricle

A 53-year-old male patient underwent implantable Cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation with a single lead (Endotak ®) transvenous system due to recurrent episodes of drug refractory ventricular tachycardia. After pulse generator replacement, inappropriate ICD shocks were observed due to muscle potential sensing. Intraoperatively, the old Endotak ® lead could not be extracted; therefore, it was transsected and capped. A new lead was inserted and tested without any problems. At the predischarge test, VF was induced and was followed by ICD shocks during sinus rhythm. In another surgical procedure, the old Endotak ® lead was explanted using a special instrument. The present report demonstrates that two endocardial Endotak ® leads should be avoided, because the leads may disturb each other and be followed by inappropriate ICD discharges.     

Incidence of ICD Lead Related Complications During Long-Term Follow-Up: Comparison of Epicardial and Endocardial Electrode Systems

The aim of this study was to evaluate the longterm stability of epicardial and endocardial lead systems for third-generation cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and to assess the usefulness of diagnostic tools. One hundred forty patients with 61 epicardial (43.6%) and 79 nonthoracotomy systems (56.4%) were followed for 2 5 ± 19 months. A total of 18 (12.9%) lead related complications were documented. Complications of epicardial systems were detected in 10 patients (16.4%) during a follow-up time of 36 ± 8 months: crinkling of patch electrodes in 6 patients (9.8%), insulation breakage of sensing electrodes in 2 patients (3.3%), and adapter defect in 2 patients (3.3%). Eight of the patients (10.1%) with transvenous-subcutaneous systems had lead related complications during a 13 ± 6 months follow-up: fracture of the subcutaneous patch lead in 2 patients (2.5%), dislodgment of the right ventricular lead in 2 patients (2.5%), dislodgment of the superior vena cava lead in 2 patients (2.5%), insulation breakage of sensing electrodes in 1 patient (1.3%), and connector defect in 1 patient (1.3%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of lead related complications between epicardial and endocardial systems (P > 0.05). Fractures, dislodgments, and crinklings were documented within the first 8 ± 5 months by regular chest X ray. Defects of insulation, adapter, or connector were detected 22 ± 10 months after implantation and were associated with delivery of multiple inappropriate ICD therapies. An operative lead revision was indicated for 4 epicardial (6.6%) and 6 endocardial (7.6%) lead systems. Conclusions: Endocardial lead systems offer a similar long-term stability as compared to epicardial had systems. Chest X ray is the most useful tool to detect lead fracture, dislodgment. and patch crinkling. Marker recordings or real-time electrograms have not been helpful in this series to identify patients with suspected lead defects prior to the experience of inappropriate ICD discharges.     

Successful Percutaneous Extraction of a Chronic Left Ventricular Pacing Lead

This report describes a patient with a chronic endocardial left ventricular pacing lead. To avoid the risk of future embolization, it was felt that the lead should be removed and right ventricular pacing established. The lead was carefully evaluated by transesophageal echocardiography to exclude adherent thrombus. Successful percutaneous lead extraction was accomplished without sequelae, thus avoiding the morbidity of a thoracotomy.     

Laser lead extraction: predictors of success and complications

BACKGROUND: Paralleling the rise in pacemaker and defibrillator implantations, lead extraction procedures are increasingly required. Concerns regarding failure and complications remain. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 200 lead extraction procedures were performed at the Montreal Heart Institute between September 2000 and August 2005. In 23 patients, all leads were removed by traction with a locking stylet. A total of 270 leads were extracted using a laser sheath system (Spectranectics, Colorado Springs, CO, USA) in 177 procedures involving 175 patients (74% male), age 62+/-16 years. Procedural indications were: infection 88 (50%), dysfunction 54 (30%), upgrade 21 (12%), and other 14 (8%). Overall, 241 leads (89%) were successfully extracted, 7 (3%) were partially extracted (< or = 4 cm retained), and 22 (8%) were non-extractable. In multivariate analyses, predictors of failed extraction were longer time from implant (OR 1.16 per year, P=0.0001) and history of hypertension (OR 5.2, P=0.0023). Acute complications occurred in 14 of 177 procedures (7.9%): 8 (4.5%) minor and 6 (3.4%) major, with one death. In multivariate analyses, the only predictor of acute complications was laser lead extraction from both right and left sides during the same procedure (OR 9.4, P = 0.0119). In addition, 3 of 10 patients with failed or partially extracted infected systems eventually required open chest explantation because of endocarditis. CONCLUSION: Most leads not amenable to manual traction may be successfully extracted by a percutaneous laser sheath system. While most complications are minor, major complications including death may occur. Older leads are at higher risk for failed extraction. Endocarditis may ensue if infected leads are incompletely removed.     

Pacing and Defibrillation Lead Exchange Without Vein Puncture

Background: During lead implantation, venous access is generally achieved by puncturing the subclavian or axillary vein. Sometimes, although rarely, after lead positioning, the lead must be changed because of its inadequate mechanical stability or poor pacing parameters. This report concerns a technique of lead exchange that avoids an additional vein puncture.
Method: The tip of the lead, that has to be replaced, is retracted from the right atrium or ventricle into the superior vena cava; the lead insulation is lanced along a few millimeters; the straight flexible tip of the guide wire is inserted between the insulation layer and the conductor of the lead. Then the lead is advanced, while the guide wire is driven in, until the tip of the guide wire is in the superior vena cava. At this point, the tip of the guide wire, gently retracted from its position, is released in the vein lumen. Subsequently, the lead is completely extracted from the vein but the guide wire is maintained inside it. A dilator with a mounted peel-away sheath is advanced over the guide wire. The lead positioning follows in the usual manner.
Results: Three (2.2%) of the 139 implanted defibrillator leads and 13 (3.3%) of the 391 pacing leads were replaced. All the procedures were successful; their mean time was 2 ± 1 minutes.
Conclusion: This technique is successful and safe in providing vein access using the previously implanted lead, thus avoiding the need to repeat the puncturing of a vein.     

Stability of Permanent Transvenous Dual-Chamber Pacing Electrodes During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

For long-term dual-chamber permanent pacing, atrial and ventricular lead stability is essential. In our overall experience with such pacing systems, four patients suffered cardiac arrest at a time distant from their pacemaker implantation. Since all four patients received prolonged closed chest cardiopulmonary resuscitation, we analyzed these events to determine whether dual-chamber endocardial electrodes would remain stable in such traumatic conditions. Reliable atrial and ventricular lead position was confirmed at autopsy in the three patients whose resuscitation attempts were unsuccessful and, in the fourth patient, by continued normal lead position and pacing function post-resuscitation. The keys to this stability include the use of tined atrial and ventricular endocardial leads and specific maneuvers at the time of implantation to verify fixation. Long-term stability of presently available endocardial leads in dual-chamber pacing systems can thus be anticipated.     

Stability of permanent transvenous dual-chamber pacing electrodes during cardiopulmonary resuscitation

For long-term dual-chamber permanent pacing, atrial and ventricular lead stability is essential. In our overall experience with such pacing systems, four patients suffered cardiac arrest at a time distant from their pacemaker implantation. Since all four patients received prolonged closed chest cardiopulmonary resuscitation, we analyzed these events to determine whether dual-chamber endocardial electrodes would remain stable in such traumatic conditions. Reliable atrial and ventricular lead position was confirmed at autopsy in the three patients whose resuscitation attempts were unsuccessful and, in the fourth patient, by continued normal lead position and pacing function post-resuscitation. The keys to this stability include the use of tined atrial and ventricular endocardial leads and specific maneuvers at the time of implantation to verify fixation. Long-term stability of presently available endocardial leads in dual-chamber pacing systems can thus be anticipated.     

Spurious Discharges Due to Late Insulation Break in Endocardial Sensing Leads for Cardioverter Defibrillators

Despite their similarity to permanent pacemaker leads, endocardial sensing leads for Cardioverter defibrillators have a relatively high failure rate. We describe four patients with endocardial rate sensing leads who developed inappropriate discharges 10–30 months after implantation due to small breaks in the lead insulation. This problem may become increasingly common as the number of Cardioverter defibrillator implants with transvenous leads continues to grow and should be considered in the differential diagnosis of late sensing failure or inappropriate device discharges.     

Coronary Sinus Lead Extraction

TYERS, G.F.O., et al .: Coronary Sinus Lead Extraction. Complications are reported more frequently with the implantation of coronary sinus (CS) than other types of leads, and attempts to extract CS leads may also be associated with increased risks. The authors have performed nonthoracotomy lead extraction (LE) since 1981 and maintained a detailed database. By November 2001, 796 leads had been removed from 401 patients. We undertook review of our CS-LE experience to evaluate prevalence, safety, and efficacy. Of 14 patients referred for CS-LE, 7 were treated in the last year. In six the lead had been placed in the CS intentionally, and in eight inadvertently. One recent patient treated with biventricular pacing was septic and died before LE was undertaken. In nine men and four women (mean age 66 years) had one each CS lead and a total of 34 LEs (2.6/patient). Four CS leads had been in place for <6 months (mean 1.5 month), whereas nine had been in place for between 6 months and 27 years. Several LE methods were used, from simple traction to the use of intraluminal locking stylets and powered sheaths. Complete removal of all leads was achieved in all patients. CS-LE required a mean of 13 minutes, including 1.8 minutes of fluoroscopy. There were no serious complications during the procedures, and the mean hospital stay was 4 days. (PACE 2003; 26[Pt. II]:524–526)     

Retrieval of pacemaker lead tip embolized into the distal pulmonary arterial bed during extraction procedure

A patient required lead extraction of a dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator system for a chronic pocket infection. Using a right subclavian approach, the right ventricular leads were removed by dilation/counter traction. During the procedure, the tip of the atrial lead was cut and, while the body of the lead was extracted, the tip embolized into a distal branch of the right pulmonary artery. Despite its distal location, we were able to extract the lead tip by an Amplatz goose neck snare kit for intravascular foreign body retrieval, commonly used by interventional radiologists, in cooperation with our radiology staff.     

A Modified Transvenous Single Mechanical Dilatation Technique to Remove a Chronically Implanted Active‐Fixation Coronary Sinus Pacing Lead

We described a 77‐year‐old patient, previously implanted with a dual‐chamber pacemaker later upgraded to a cardiac resynchronization therapy‐defibrillator (CRT‐D) device with an active‐fixation coronary sinus pacing lead, who underwent a transvenous mechanical extraction procedure for a device‐related systemic infection. All leads were removed successfully with a transvenous approach. With regard to the coronary sinus (CS) lead (Attain 4195 StarFix, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA), manual traction was ineffective and extraction required long and challenging mechanical dilatation up to distal CS using either conventional sheaths or modified CS lead delivery. (PACE 2010; 34:e66–e69)