Why the study?
Does lead extraction improve cure rates in patients with infected pacing and ICD leads?
Does lead extraction improve cure rates in patients with infected pacing and ICD leads?
Lead extraction is highly effective for curing pacemaker or ICD-related infections, but carries a significant risk of major complications, highlighting the need to reconsider routine generator replacement in patients without a valid pacing indication.
May support extraction for device infections despite complications; leaves open net benefit in broader populations.
AIMS: We report a single-centre experience of extraction of infected pacing and ICD leads. METHODS: Retrospective study of consecutive lead extractions for infection. Lead extraction was by traction, or, if unsuccessful, a laser sheath was used. All procedures were performed in the operating room. RESULTS: Leads were extracted in 82 patients including 66 patients (80%) with infection occurring after replacement of the generator or revision of the leads. Previous treatment, without lead extraction, had failed in 51 patients (62%). Major complications (tamponade or haemothorax) occurred in 6 patients, 2 patients died despite emergency surgery. One patient succumbed to ongoing sepsis. Of the patients alive, a follow-up of at least 6 months (27 +/- 17 months) was available in 76 patients. All patients were cured; none had a recurrence. In 31 patients (41%) pacing was abandoned after lead extraction; all remained asymptomatic. CONCLUSION: Lead extraction is effective in curing pacemaker or ICD related infection, even after failed conservative therapy, but with a significant complication rate. The routine replacement of the generator should be reconsidered in patients in whom the indication for pacing is no longer valid, as the majority of infections occurred after revision of the system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Frank Bracke (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: