This website is intended for healthcare professionals only

Trending Topic

Abstract stethoscope integrated with a smartphone screen, representing digital health, telemedicine, and medical technology health care
16 mins

Trending Topic

Developed by Touch
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide.1 High systolic blood pressure (SBP) remains one of the top risk factors for CVD burden globally.2 Despite being a modifiable risk factor, hypertension (HTN) remains largely undiagnosed and untreated due to inadequate screening, poor awareness and lack of treatment adherence.3 Globally, HTN is undiagnosed in about 46% […]

46/Transvenous lead extraction: a single-centre experience of the Tandem procedure

MM Gallagher (Presenting Author) – St George’s University Hospital, London; Z Akhtar – St George’s University Hospital, London; LWM Leung – St George’s University Hospital, London; M Sohal – St George’s University Hospital, London
< 1 min
Share
Facebook
X (formerly Twitter)
LinkedIn
Via Email
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked
Copy LinkLink Copied
Published Online: Oct 9th 2012 European Journal of Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology. 2022;8(Suppl. 1):abstr46
Select a Section…
1

Article

Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is integral to the management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). There are notable procedural risks; however, development of techniques has contributed to an improvement in safety. The mechanical rotational dissecting sheath is safe and efficacious whilst the Needle’s Eye Snare (NES) is an additional ‘bail-out’ strategy. We compared the conventional TLE technique with the ‘Tandem’ procedure.

Methods: The ‘Tandem’ procedure consisted of extraction with the rotational powered sheath from the superior access, in combination with the NES providing countertraction on the lead via the femoral vein. Thirty-seven consecutive ‘Tandem’ procedures (73 targeted leads) performed between 1/12/2021–1/1/2022 in our high-volume TLE institute were matched with 37 conventional TLE procedures (72 leads) (control) using propensity 1:1 score matching. The patients were matched for age, BMI, gender and LVEF.

Results: Compared with the control, the Tandem group had a significantly longer lead dwell time (96 ± 67 months vs 147.3 ± 74 months; p<0.05), requiring a shorter procedure duration (136 ± 64 minutes vs 94 ± 38 minutes; p<0.02), with more fluoroscopy (9.7 ± 8.5 minutes vs 18.6 ± 11.9 minutes; p<0.01). Clinical success was similar between the control and Tandem groups (97% vs 100%; p=0.4) as was complete success (per lead) (95% vs 92%; p=0.7), with a comparable major (5% vs 0%; p=0.4) and minor (0% vs 3%; p=0.57) complication rate; there was no difference in 30-day mortality (3% vs 0%; p=0.4).

Conclusion: The ‘Tandem’ procedure provides an additional strategy to improve the safety and efficacy of TLE, especially in leads of a long dwell time.

2

Further Resources

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