Procedural outcome & risk prediction in young patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction-a GALLERY subgroup analysis.
cardiac implantable electronic device
lead management
outcomes
risk factors
transvenous lead extraction
young adults
Journal
Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine
ISSN: 2297-055X
Titre abrégé: Front Cardiovasc Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101653388
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
30
06
2023
accepted:
09
08
2023
medline:
25
9
2023
pubmed:
25
9
2023
entrez:
25
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The prevalence of young patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is steadily increasing, accompanied by a rise in the occurrence of complications related to CIEDs. Consequently, transvenous lead extraction (TLE) has become a crucial treatment approach for such individuals. The purpose of this study was to examine the characteristics and procedural outcomes of young patients who undergo TLE, with a specific focus on identifying independent risk factors associated with adverse events. All patients in the GALLERY (GermAn Laser Lead Extraction RegistrY) were categorized into two groups based on their age at the time of enrollment: 45 years or younger, and over 45 years. A subgroup analysis was conducted specifically for the younger population. In this analysis, predictor variables for all-cause mortality, procedural complications, and procedural failure were evaluated using multivariable analyses. We identified 160 patients aged 45 years or younger with a mean age of 35.3 ± 7.6 years and 42.5% ( TLE in young patients is safe and effective with a procedure-related mortality rate of 0.0%. CKD and systemic infection are predictors for all-cause mortality, whereas lead age ≥ 10 years was identified as independent risk factor for procedural complications in young patients undergoing TLE.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The prevalence of young patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is steadily increasing, accompanied by a rise in the occurrence of complications related to CIEDs. Consequently, transvenous lead extraction (TLE) has become a crucial treatment approach for such individuals.
Objective
UNASSIGNED
The purpose of this study was to examine the characteristics and procedural outcomes of young patients who undergo TLE, with a specific focus on identifying independent risk factors associated with adverse events.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
All patients in the GALLERY (GermAn Laser Lead Extraction RegistrY) were categorized into two groups based on their age at the time of enrollment: 45 years or younger, and over 45 years. A subgroup analysis was conducted specifically for the younger population. In this analysis, predictor variables for all-cause mortality, procedural complications, and procedural failure were evaluated using multivariable analyses.
Results
UNASSIGNED
We identified 160 patients aged 45 years or younger with a mean age of 35.3 ± 7.6 years and 42.5% (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
TLE in young patients is safe and effective with a procedure-related mortality rate of 0.0%. CKD and systemic infection are predictors for all-cause mortality, whereas lead age ≥ 10 years was identified as independent risk factor for procedural complications in young patients undergoing TLE.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37745113
doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1251055
pmc: PMC10511873
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1251055Informations de copyright
© 2023 Rexha, Chung, Burger, Ghaffari, Madej, Ziaukas, Hassan, Reichenspurner, Gessler, Willems, Butter, Pecha and Hakmi.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Europace. 2019 Apr 1;21(4):645-654
pubmed: 30624715
Adv Clin Exp Med. 2023 Mar 07;:
pubmed: 36881368
Circulation. 2007 May 15;115(19):2474-80
pubmed: 17470696
Heart Rhythm. 2017 Dec;14(12):e503-e551
pubmed: 28919379
Sci Rep. 2022 Jun 10;12(1):9601
pubmed: 35689031
Circulation. 2013 Jun 18;127(24):2393-402
pubmed: 23694966
J Cardiol. 2017 Jul;70(1):7-17
pubmed: 28583688
Europace. 2021 Sep 8;23(9):1462-1471
pubmed: 33615342
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2022 Mar;8(3):343-353
pubmed: 35331429
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2023 Jan;46(1):66-72
pubmed: 36441922
Europace. 2017 Aug 01;19(suppl_2):ii1-ii90
pubmed: 28903470
Europace. 2015 May;17(5):767-77
pubmed: 25926473
J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Mar 09;5(3):e002798
pubmed: 26961369
Europace. 2021 Jun 23;23(23 Suppl 4):iv3-iv10
pubmed: 34051086
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019 Sep;5(9):1071-1080
pubmed: 31537337
Heart Rhythm. 2014 Dec;11(12):2196-201
pubmed: 25111324
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2020 Nov 30;7:602179
pubmed: 33330664
Europace. 2020 Jul 1;22(7):1097-1102
pubmed: 32447372
Europace. 2002 Jan;4(1):19-24
pubmed: 11858151
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011 Aug;34(8):1013-27
pubmed: 21707667
Europace. 2022 Oct 13;24(10):1627-1635
pubmed: 35718878
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Feb 9;55(6):579-86
pubmed: 20152562
Heart Rhythm. 2009 Jan;6(1):65-8
pubmed: 19121802
Heart Rhythm. 2023 Feb;20(2):181-189
pubmed: 36240993
Europace. 2019 Nov 1;21(11):1703-1709
pubmed: 31545350
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2021 Sep;44(9):1540-1548
pubmed: 34235772
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2010 Aug;3(4):413-24; discussion 424
pubmed: 20716723
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2006 May;29(5):461-6
pubmed: 16689839
Eur Heart J. 2017 Oct 21;38(40):2995-3005
pubmed: 28369414
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017 Jan;3(1):1-9
pubmed: 29759687
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2021 Apr;44(4):601-606
pubmed: 33594705
Eur Heart J. 2022 Dec 14;43(47):4946-4956
pubmed: 36263789
Europace. 2018 Jul 1;20(7):1217
pubmed: 29566158
Circulation. 2017 Oct 10;136(15):1387-1395
pubmed: 28830879
Heart Rhythm. 2017 Apr;14(4):537-540
pubmed: 28189822
Europace. 2023 Feb 16;25(2):591-599
pubmed: 36352816