Key result
Real-time TEE monitoring during transvenous lead extraction did not significantly change procedural success (97.8% vs 96.5%, p=0.41) or complications (8.6% vs 12.2%, p=0.40) compared to no TEE.
Why the study?
Although transesophageal echocardiography has become standard during transvenous lead extraction procedures, its effect and role have not been optimally defined.
Does real-time TEE monitoring improve procedural success and reduce complications in high-risk patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction?
Cohort (n=195)
No
Does real-time TEE monitoring improve procedural success and reduce complications in high-risk patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction?
Absolute Event Rate: 97.8% vs 96.5%
p-value: p=0.41
While real-time TEE monitoring during transvenous lead extraction did not significantly alter procedural success or complication rates, it provided valuable clinical information to guide therapy.
Does not support routine TEE use in lead extraction; leaves open its value in selected cases pending randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is commonly used during cardiothoracic procedures. TEE has also become standard during transvenous lead extraction (TLE) procedures, but its effect and role have not been optimally defined. The goal of this study is to identify how TEE was used during TLE at our institute and review its utility. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed high-risk patients undergoing TLE, for whom more complications during extraction procedures, from June 2012 to September 2020. The patients were divided into TEE group and non-TEE group according to real-time TEE monitoring. We compared the rate of procedural success, complications between two groups and concluded the clinical utility of TEE during TLE. RESULTS: A total of 195 patients were included (105 in TEE group vs 90 in non-TEE group), the rate of procedure success (97.8% vs 96.5%, p = 0.41) and complications during extraction (8.6% vs 12.2%, p = 0.40, major complication 5.7% vs 12.2%, p = 0.11, minor complication 2.9% vs 0%, p = 0.30) were comparable. In TEE group, 12 patients (11.4%) received following benefits: altering surgical plans, guiding subsequent therapy strategies, and rapidly diagnosing complications, moreover no complications occurred from TEE. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that real-time monitoring by TEE cannot change the rate of procedural success and complication during TLE; however, TEE provides valuable information to instruct clinical therapy and improves the safety of TLE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Transvenous lead extraction (n=195). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) vs. No TEE (non-TEE group) was evaluated on Procedural success (p=0.41). Real-time TEE monitoring during transvenous lead extraction did not significantly change procedural success (97.8% vs 96.5%, p=0.41) or complications (8.6% vs 12.2%, p=0.40) compared to no TEE.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: