Transvenous lead extraction of infected CRT systems showed similar procedural success and complication rates to pacemaker extraction, despite higher >1-year mortality (22.7% vs 8.7%).
Cohort (n=3,468)
No
Does transvenous lead extraction of infected CRT systems increase procedural risk compared to extraction of other infected CIED systems in patients with device infections?
Transvenous lead extraction of infected CRT systems is as safe and effective as extraction of other CIEDs, with procedural complexity driven more by implant duration than device type.
Absolute Event Rate: 22.7% vs 8.7%
Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices is considered as more risky. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of TLE in patients with infected CRT systems. Methods: Data of 3468 patients undergoing TLE in a single high-volume center in years 2006−2021 were analyzed. The clinical and procedural parameters as well as the efficacy and safety of TLE were compared between patients with infected CRT and pacemakers (PM) and ICD systems. Results: Infectious indications for TLE occurred in 1138 patients, including 150 infected CRT (112 CRT-D and 38 CRT-P). The general health condition of CRT patients was worse with higher Charlson’s comorbidity index. The number of extracted leads was higher in the CRT group, but implant duration was significantly longer in the PM than in the ICD and CRT groups (98.93 vs. 55.26 vs. 55.43 months p < 0.01). The procedure was longer in duration, more difficult, and more complex in patients with pacemakers than in those in the CRT group. The occurrence of major complications and clinical and procedural success as well as procedure-related death did not show any relationship to the type of CIED device. Mortality at more than one-year follow-up after TLE was significantly higher among patients with CRT devices (22.7% vs. 8.7%) than among those in the PM group. Conclusion: Despite the greater burden of lead and comorbidities, the complexity and efficiency of removing infected CRT systems is no more dangerous than removing other infected systems. The duration of the implant seems to play a dominant role.
Stefańczyk et al. (Tue,) conducted a cohort in Infected cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices (n=3,468). Transvenous lead extraction of infected CRT systems vs. Extraction of infected pacemakers (PM) and ICD systems was evaluated on Mortality at more than one-year follow-up. Transvenous lead extraction of infected CRT systems showed similar procedural success and complication rates to pacemaker extraction, despite higher >1-year mortality (22.7% vs 8.7%).