Key result
Adding pacing/sensing leads shows no difference in TR change versus new ICD leads.
Why the study?
Patient- and lead-related factors predisposing to tricuspid regurgitation after cardiac implantable electronic device placement remain unclear, prompting evaluation of tricuspid valve function after additional pacing/sensing or ICD lead implantation for lead failure.
Does additional pacing/sensing lead implantation compared to ICD lead implantation worsen tricuspid regurgitation in patients with ICD lead failure?
Case-Control (n=52)
No
Does additional pacing/sensing lead implantation compared to ICD lead implantation worsen tricuspid regurgitation in patients with ICD lead failure?
Adding a pacing/sensing lead or a new ICD lead without extraction in patients with lead failure does not significantly worsen tricuspid valve function.
Additional leads not associated with TR progression; leaves open whether lead burden influences device-related TR.
BACKGROUND: The development or progression of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) following the implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) represents a significant concern. Although the link between transvalvular lead placement and TR is well established, the patient-related and lead-related factors that predispose patients to develop TR remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of additional pacing/sensing leads (PSL) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads on tricuspid valve function in patients with lead failure. METHODS: In this retrospective, single-center, case-control study, all ICD implantation patients, in cases performed by one of these authors, presenting with lead failure were screened. The degree of TR on pre- and post-procedural echocardiograms of patients who underwent additional PSL or ICD lead implantation is compared. RESULTS: The study comprised a total of 52 patients; 28 patients received PSL, and 24 patients received ICD electrodes. A non-significant increase in the degree of TR was observed in patients who underwent new ICD lead implantation (P = .059). The degree of TR observed in patients who underwent new PSL implantation was found to be comparable to the pre-procedure levels (P = .180). However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 groups with respect to change in TR degree (P = .123). CONCLUSION: This study is the first analysis comparing the effect of ICD electrode addition with PSL addition without lead extraction on right ventricular and tricuspid valve function in patients with lead failure. This study provides the first comparative analysis of PSL versus ICD lead addition in patients with lead failure. The findings suggest that additional leads, whether PSL or ICD, do not significantly worsen tricuspid valve function. The addition of PSL to the IS-1/DF-1 ICD lead with standard high-voltage leads may be a viable treatment option, as it yields similar results to a new ICD lead implantation in terms of right heart function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gorgulu et al. (2026) conducted a case-control in Lead failure (n=52). Additional pacing/sensing leads (PSL) vs. New ICD lead implantation was evaluated on Change in degree of tricuspid regurgitation (p=.123). Addition of pacing/sensing leads compared to new ICD leads in patients with lead failure resulted in no significant difference in the change of tricuspid regurgitation degree (P=0.123).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: