Tricuspid Valve Damage Related to Transvenous Lead Extraction.
long-term survival
risk factors
transvenous lead extraction complications
tricuspid valve damage
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 09 2022
27 09 2022
Historique:
received:
28
08
2022
revised:
20
09
2022
accepted:
21
09
2022
entrez:
14
10
2022
pubmed:
15
10
2022
medline:
18
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Damage to the tricuspid valve (TVD) is now considered either a major or minor complication of the transvenous lead extraction procedure (TLE). As yet, the risk factors and long-term survival after TLE in patients with TVD have not been analyzed in detail. This post hoc analysis used clinical data of 2631 patients (mean age 66.86 years, 39.64% females) who underwent TLE procedures performed in three high-volume centers. The risk factors and long-term survival of patients with worsening tricuspid valve (TV) function after TLE were analyzed. In most procedures (90.31%), TLE had no negative influence on TV function, but in 9.69% of patients, a worsening of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) to varying degrees was noted, including significant dysfunction in 2.54% of patients. Risk factors of TLE relating to severe TVD were: TLE of pacing leads (5.264; Severe tricuspid valve damage related to TLE is relatively rare (2.5%). The main risk factors for the worsening of TV function are associated with a longer lead dwell time (more often the pacing lead), causing stronger connective tissue scars connecting the lead to the tricuspid apparatus and right ventricle. TVD is unlikely to affect long-term survival after TLE.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Damage to the tricuspid valve (TVD) is now considered either a major or minor complication of the transvenous lead extraction procedure (TLE). As yet, the risk factors and long-term survival after TLE in patients with TVD have not been analyzed in detail.
METHODS
This post hoc analysis used clinical data of 2631 patients (mean age 66.86 years, 39.64% females) who underwent TLE procedures performed in three high-volume centers. The risk factors and long-term survival of patients with worsening tricuspid valve (TV) function after TLE were analyzed.
RESULTS
In most procedures (90.31%), TLE had no negative influence on TV function, but in 9.69% of patients, a worsening of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) to varying degrees was noted, including significant dysfunction in 2.54% of patients. Risk factors of TLE relating to severe TVD were: TLE of pacing leads (5.264;
CONCLUSIONS
Severe tricuspid valve damage related to TLE is relatively rare (2.5%). The main risk factors for the worsening of TV function are associated with a longer lead dwell time (more often the pacing lead), causing stronger connective tissue scars connecting the lead to the tricuspid apparatus and right ventricle. TVD is unlikely to affect long-term survival after TLE.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36231579
pii: ijerph191912279
doi: 10.3390/ijerph191912279
pmc: PMC9566121
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Lead
2P299V784P
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Jun 9;53(23):2168-74
pubmed: 19497444
Biomed Res Int. 2018 Dec 18;2018:8796704
pubmed: 30662917
Heart Rhythm. 2017 Dec;14(12):e503-e551
pubmed: 28919379
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2000 Apr;23(4 Pt 1):544-51
pubmed: 10793452
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Oct 03;18(19):
pubmed: 34639716
Heart Rhythm. 2015 Feb;12(2):313-20
pubmed: 25311409
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017 Jun 1;51(6):1108-1111
pubmed: 28204134
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019 Feb;5(2):174-182
pubmed: 30784687
J Clin Med. 2020 Jan 28;9(2):
pubmed: 32013032
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 Nov;4(11):1421-1428
pubmed: 30466846
Heart Rhythm. 2014 Mar;11(3):419-25
pubmed: 24315967
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Dec 10;74(23):2845-2854
pubmed: 31806127
Heart Rhythm. 2009 Jul;6(7):1085-104
pubmed: 19560098
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1999 Jun;22(6 Pt 1):971-4
pubmed: 10392401
J Clin Med. 2020 May 08;9(5):
pubmed: 32397115
Europace. 2012 Jan;14(1):124-34
pubmed: 22167387
Isr Med Assoc J. 2016 Jan;18(1):18-22
pubmed: 26964274
Europace. 2018 Aug 1;20(8):1324-1333
pubmed: 29016781
Europace. 2021 Sep 8;23(9):1462-1471
pubmed: 33615342
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2014 Aug;15(8):668-73
pubmed: 24850500
Kardiol Pol. 2020 Dec 23;78(12):1206-1214
pubmed: 33078921
Europace. 2019 May 1;21(5):771-780
pubmed: 30590520
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2021 Aug 05;17:445-459
pubmed: 34385818
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2002 Nov;25(11):1583-6
pubmed: 12494615
Eur J Echocardiogr. 2010 May;11(4):307-32
pubmed: 20435783
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Feb 9;55(6):579-86
pubmed: 20152562
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2014 Jan;37(1):19-24
pubmed: 23991637
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2015 Dec;38(12):1439-47
pubmed: 26293652
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Aug 28;18(17):
pubmed: 34501689
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2021 Jan;41(1):25-41
pubmed: 32949059
Heart Rhythm. 2018 Nov;15(11):1655-1663
pubmed: 29803849
Echocardiography. 2020 Apr;37(4):601-611
pubmed: 32154950
Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2021 Apr;11(2):394-410
pubmed: 33968618
Europace. 2018 Jul 1;20(7):1217
pubmed: 29566158
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2013 Aug;36(8):939-44
pubmed: 23713555
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019 Dec;5(12):1450-1458
pubmed: 31857046
Heart Rhythm. 2014 May;11(5):799-805
pubmed: 24444444
Tex Heart Inst J. 2011;38(3):305-7
pubmed: 21720480