Key result
Intraprocedural lead stability protocol linked to ~61% fewer 30-day dislodgements vs. standard practice.
Why the study?
Lead dislodgement is a well-recognized complication during implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices, and strategies to reduce its incidence are needed.
Does an intraprocedural reduction of lead dislodgement protocol reduce the incidence of lead dislodgement in the first 30 days after implant in patients undergoing CIED implantation?
Cohort
Does an intraprocedural reduction of lead dislodgement protocol reduce the incidence of lead dislodgement in the first 30 days after implant in patients undergoing CIED implantation?
Implementation of a standardized intraprocedural protocol involving mechanical and pacing maneuvers significantly reduces the risk of 30-day lead dislodgement during CIED implantation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support intraprocedural stability checks to lower lead dislodgement risk; leaves open need for randomized confirmation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Lead dislodgement (LD) is a well-recognized complication during implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). An intraprocedural protocol, referred to as reduction of LD protocol, was developed to reduce the risk of LD. METHODS: The protocol involved (1) inserting a straight stylet down the right atrial lead and applying forward pressure while monitoring for fluoroscopic stability, (2) visualizing all leads during deep inspiration to determine if there is adequate lead redundancy, and (3) having the patient take a deep breath and cough while pacing just at capture threshold to assess for loss of capture in each lead. Any intraprocedural change in the parameters fulfilling the predefined criteria for inadequate lead implantation prompted lead repositioning. Data regarding demographic factors, clinical characteristics, and incidence of LD in the first 30 days after implant was obtained from intramural CIED database. The preintervention (control) group spanned 27 months and consisted of a total of 4,294 leads while the postintervention (intervention) group spanned 17 months and consisted of 2,361 leads implanted. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the demographic factors and clinical characteristics in the two groups. Protocol compliance was > 90%. There were 44 occurrences of LD (1.02%) before and 10 (0.4%) after implementation of the protocol. The protocol significantly reduced the incidence of LD during the 30 days after implant (P = 0.014). No clinical characteristic predicted the risk of LD. CONCLUSION: Intraprocedural maneuvers performed to assess the adequacy of lead implantation results in reduced risk of LD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Afzal et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implantation. Intraprocedural reduction of lead dislodgement protocol vs. Preintervention (standard practice) was evaluated on Incidence of lead dislodgement in the first 30 days after implant (p=0.014). An intraprocedural protocol to assess lead stability significantly reduced the 30-day incidence of lead dislodgement compared to standard practice (0.4% vs 1.02%; P=0.014).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: