The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: a single-centre study of electrosurgical and laser extraction.

Extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: a single-centre study of electrosurgical and laser extraction.
Extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: a single-centre study of electrosurgical and laser extraction.
Aims:

Both electrosurgical dissection (EDS) and laser tools are effective in the extraction of chronic implanted endovascular leads. It is unclear which is superior. We undertook a retrospective single-centre study to assess this.

Methods and Results:

In our institution from 2000 to 2004, all extractions requiring an ablative sheath were performed using the EDS system. In 2004, an excimer laser system was acquired, which became the first choice. Consecutive patients undergoing extraction requiring an ablative sheath (EDS or laser) were studied. From 2000 to 2007, 140 leads were extracted from 74 patients (EDS 31 and laser 43). Procedural success was non-significantly higher in the laser vs. the EDS group (95 vs. 87%). In the EDS group, one patient suffered tamponade requiring surgery; in the laser group, one patient suffered a significant pericardial effusion treated conservatively. There were no deaths. Procedure and fluoroscopy times were similar between groups. More patients were referred for primary surgical extraction in the EDS vs. the laser era (7 vs. 0, P = 0.003).

Conclusion:

Lead extraction using an ablative sheath is safe and effective. In our small study, there were no significant differences between EDS and laser sheaths in terms of success, time, or safety.

1099-5129
1501-1504
Scott, P. A.
a40db841-8565-452b-91c9-a2be2ce6e732
Chow, W.
71e166f8-0284-4a3a-bc18-e5ecfdbae161
Ellis, E.
3d6ac01e-a0b4-40dd-90ac-4e7b6b04faec
Morgan, J. M.
55b8f5d2-402d-41fb-9bbf-73d9f9e522fe
Roberts, P. R.
193431e8-f9d5-48d6-8f62-ed9052b2571d
Scott, P. A.
a40db841-8565-452b-91c9-a2be2ce6e732
Chow, W.
71e166f8-0284-4a3a-bc18-e5ecfdbae161
Ellis, E.
3d6ac01e-a0b4-40dd-90ac-4e7b6b04faec
Morgan, J. M.
55b8f5d2-402d-41fb-9bbf-73d9f9e522fe
Roberts, P. R.
193431e8-f9d5-48d6-8f62-ed9052b2571d

Scott, P. A., Chow, W., Ellis, E., Morgan, J. M. and Roberts, P. R. (2009) Extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: a single-centre study of electrosurgical and laser extraction. Europace, 11 (11), 1501-1504.

Record type: Article

Abstract

Aims:

Both electrosurgical dissection (EDS) and laser tools are effective in the extraction of chronic implanted endovascular leads. It is unclear which is superior. We undertook a retrospective single-centre study to assess this.

Methods and Results:

In our institution from 2000 to 2004, all extractions requiring an ablative sheath were performed using the EDS system. In 2004, an excimer laser system was acquired, which became the first choice. Consecutive patients undergoing extraction requiring an ablative sheath (EDS or laser) were studied. From 2000 to 2007, 140 leads were extracted from 74 patients (EDS 31 and laser 43). Procedural success was non-significantly higher in the laser vs. the EDS group (95 vs. 87%). In the EDS group, one patient suffered tamponade requiring surgery; in the laser group, one patient suffered a significant pericardial effusion treated conservatively. There were no deaths. Procedure and fluoroscopy times were similar between groups. More patients were referred for primary surgical extraction in the EDS vs. the laser era (7 vs. 0, P = 0.003).

Conclusion:

Lead extraction using an ablative sheath is safe and effective. In our small study, there were no significant differences between EDS and laser sheaths in terms of success, time, or safety.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 29 September 2009

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 151091
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/151091
ISSN: 1099-5129
PURE UUID: a3591c85-82f7-4ff7-a37b-7009471d6837

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 07 May 2010 14:41
Last modified: 08 Jan 2022 14:31

Export record

Contributors

Author: P. A. Scott
Author: W. Chow
Author: E. Ellis
Author: J. M. Morgan
Author: P. R. Roberts

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×