Key result
Implantation of a new atrial lead successfully restored atrioventricular synchrony and resolved heart failure symptoms in a patient who had refused lead relocation for 7 years after macro-dislodgement.
Why the study?
In patients with sick sinus syndrome and normal AV conduction, atrial lead dislocation can cause unnecessary ventricular pacing leading to heart failure, but the long-term consequences of delayed management remain worthy of reflection.
Case Report (n=1)
No
Delayed management of atrial lead dislodgement in patients with sick sinus syndrome and normal AV conduction can lead to HFpEF due to AV desynchronization, which is reversible with new atrial lead implantation.
BACKGROUND: Pacemaker lead dislodgement may cause malfunction in the pacing system, which may lead to severe adverse events. For patients with sick sinus syndrome but normal atrioventricular conduction, atrial lead dislocation may cause excessive unnecessary ventricular pacing, resulting in nonphysiological pacing leading to heart failure. The longer the unwanted ventricular pacing continues, the greater the chances that irreversible heart failure may occur. Ironically, we admitted a patient who had been refusing dislodged lead relocation for 7 years. The symptoms of heart failure were significantly resolved after new atrial lead implantation. We reviewed her clinical data before and after the procedure and believed the case was worthy of reflection. CASE PRESENTATION: An 83-year-old Han Chinese woman presented with heart failure symptoms for 7 years due to the late macro-dislodgement of an atrial pacing lead. Her echocardiogram showed average left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) but reduced left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) during right ventricular pacing, indicating heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). After 7 years of refusal, she finally agreed to implantation of a new atrial lead. She has been doing well since the operation. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with sick sinus syndrome with dual-chamber pacemaker indication, atrial lead dislodgement should be appropriately managed if the atrioventricular function is normal. As the consequences are subtle and appear gradually, they might be overlooked by patients and even doctors. Implanting a new atrial lead is the right thing to do rather than just passively waiting or treating with symptom relief medications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guan et al. (2021) conducted a case report in Atrial lead dislodgement and heart failure (n=1). New atrial lead implantation vs. Passive waiting and symptom relief medications (prior state) was evaluated on Resolution of heart failure symptoms and restoration of AV synchrony. Implantation of a new atrial lead successfully restored atrioventricular synchrony and resolved heart failure symptoms in a patient who had refused lead relocation for 7 years after macro-dislodgement.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: