This website is intended for healthcare professionals only

Trending Topic

16 mins

Trending Topic

Developed by Touch
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked

Hypertension is the leading modifiable risk factor for global cardiovascular disease, responsible for an estimated 10.8 million deaths and more than 200 million disability-adjusted life years annually.1 Despite the availability of effective pharmacological and lifestyle interventions, prevalence continues to rise, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where over three-quarters of all cases now occur.2 The condition’s […]

42/A case control study comparing long term outcomes of devices implanted via femoral vs conventional superior access

S Griffiths (Presenting Author) - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; J Behar - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; M Debney - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; C Monkhouse - Barts Heart Centre, London; M Lowe - Barts Heart Centre, London; E Cantor - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; V Boyalla - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; N Karim - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; J Till - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; V Markides - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; J Clague - Royal Brompton Hospital, London; T Wong - Royal Brompton Hospital, London
< 1 min
Share
Facebook
X (formerly Twitter)
LinkedIn
Via Email
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked
Copy LinkLink Copied
Published Online: Sep 27th 2010 European Journal of Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology. 2020;6(Suppl. 1):abstr42
Select a Section…
1

Article

Background: The conventional route to insert cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is not always possible. Devices implanted via the femoral route (F-CIED) remain an alternative option despite the advent of leadless and subcutaneous devices. However, the long-term outcomes of F-CIED, in particular complex F-CIED (implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) and cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) devices)), are not known. Furthermore, the feasibility and safety of extracting chronic femoral leads has not been reported.

Methods: All patients with F-CIED implanted between 2002-2019 at two high volume tertiary centres were included in the study. A total of 31 F-CIED (10 complex – ICD and CRT – and 21 simple – single and dual chamber pacemakers) were compared 1:3 to 93 matched controls of conventional devices implanted via superior venous access (C-CIED). Complications requiring intervention were classified as early (<30 days) and late (>30 days) following implant.

Results: Early complications were similar between F-CIED and C-CIED (6% vs 5%; p=0.85) and between complex F-CIED and simple F-CIED sub-groups (10% vs 5%; p=0.58). Late complications at 7.5 ± 4.9 years follow-up were higher with F-CIED compared to C-CIED (29% vs 11.6%; p<0.01) and greater with the complex F-CIED subgroup compared to simple F-CIED and complex C-CIED (60% vs 14% vs 7%; p<0.01). Eight of 12 late complications with F-CIED were related to the generator site including six generator erosions, one generator migration and one lead erosion. Eight femoral generators and 14 chronic leads (mean duration in situ 8.1 ± 2.1 years) were extracted without complication.

Conclusion: The early complication rate of F-CIED is similar to devices implanted by the conventional approach but there is an increased risk of late complications, particularly with complex femoral devices. Extraction of chronic femoral leads by expert operators in experienced centres is feasible and safe.

2

Further Resources

Share
Facebook
X (formerly Twitter)
LinkedIn
Via Email
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked
Copy LinkLink Copied
Close Popup