Key result
TLE during device upgrade shows ~98% success without increased major complications vs other indications.
Why the study?
Evidence on procedural outcomes of transvenous lead extraction at the time of cardiac implantable electronic device upgrade is scarce.
Does transvenous lead extraction during device upgrade increase the risk of complications compared to extraction for other reasons in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices?
Observational (n=941)
Yes
Does transvenous lead extraction during device upgrade increase the risk of complications compared to extraction for other reasons in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices?
Transvenous lead extraction during cardiac device upgrade is effective and does not carry a disproportionate risk of complications compared to extraction for other indications.
TLE during upgrades shows high success without excess risk; leaves open need for prospective confirmation before practice change.
Background: Device patients may require upgrade interventions from simpler to more complex cardiac implantable electronic devices. Prior to upgrading interventions, clinicians need to balance the risks and benefits of transvenous lead extraction (TLE), additional lead implantation or lead abandonment. However, evidence on procedural outcomes of TLE at the time of device upgrade is scarce. Methods: This is a post hoc analysis of the investigator-initiated multicenter Swiss TLE registry. The objectives were to assess patient and procedural factors influencing TLE outcomes at the time of device upgrades. Results: 941 patients were included, whereof 83 (8.8%) had TLE due to a device upgrade. Rotational mechanical sheaths were more often used in upgraded patients (59% vs. 42.7%, p = 0.015) and total median procedure time was longer in these patients (160 min vs. 105 min, p < 0.001). Clinical success rates of upgraded patients compared to those who received TLE due to other reasons were not different (97.6% vs. 93.0%, p = 0.569). Moreover, multivariable analysis showed that upgrade procedures were not associated with a greater risk for complications (HR 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.14–1.57, p = 0.224; intraprocedural complication rate of upgraded patients 7.2% vs. 5.5%). Intraprocedural complications of upgraded patients were mostly associated with the implantation and not the extraction procedure (67% vs. 33% of complications). Conclusions: TLE during device upgrade is effective and does not attribute a disproportionate risk to the upgrade procedure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haeberlin et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Patients requiring transvenous lead extraction (n=941). Transvenous lead extraction due to device upgrade vs. Transvenous lead extraction due to other indications was evaluated on Major complications (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.14-1.57, p=0.224). Transvenous lead extraction during device upgrade was highly effective (97.6% clinical success) and did not significantly increase the risk of major complications compared to other extraction indications (HR 0.48).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: