Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Radiographic predictors of failure of simple manual traction of transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads: a single-center experience

  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Extraction of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads could be a difficult procedure due to fibrous tissue around the lead and anatomical variations. In this report, we present our experience in the radiographic predictors of failure of simple manual traction (SMT) in patients with dual-coil ICD requiring lead extraction (LE).

Methods

Between January 2017 and February 2021, 103 leads were removed in 65 consecutive patients; 65 (63.1%) were dual-coil ICD leads, 22 (21.4%) were atrial, and 16 (15.5%) were coronary sinus leads. Patient-based and procedural data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Clinical and procedural characteristics were compared and radiographic predictors of failure of SMT of ICD leads were assessed. Projected anteroposterior (AP) lead tortuosity was measured and lead slack score was estimated on chest X-ray (CXR).

Results

Simple manual traction failed in 27 (42%) of the ICD leads. Ottawa slack score (odds ratio [OR] 2.368, 95% CI [1.261–4.447]; P = 0.007), AP lead tortuosity > 1.10 (OR 7.477, 95% CI [1.718–35.542]; P = 0.007), and number of previous interventions (OR 6.016, 95% CI [1.184–30.557]; P < 0.030) were found to be independently related to the failure of SMT. Receiver–operator characteristic curve analysis yielded an AP lead tortuosity cutoff value of > 1.10 for predicting the failure of SMT. The area under the curve was 0.744; the 95% confidence interval (CI) was 0.617 to 0.871 (P = 0.001), with a sensitivity of 63% and a specificity of 73%.

Conclusion

Simple manual traction success in our study varied based on radiographic lead-related parameters. Before planning the procedure, increased AP lead tortuosity in vasculature and higher lead slack score can be easily determined on CXR and may be associated with more fibrous adherences, the complexity of the LE, and failure of SMT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yap SC, Bhagwandien RE, Theuns DAMJ, Yasar YE, de Heide J, Hoogendijk MG, et al. Efficacy and safety of transvenous lead extraction using a liberal combined superior and femoral approach. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2021;62:239–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bracke F, Meijer A, Van Gelder B. Extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: patient and lead characteristics in relation to the requirement of extraction tools. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2002;25:1037–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Segreti L, Di Cori A, Soldati E, Zucchelli G, Viani S, Paperini L, et al. Major predictors of fibrous adherences in transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead extraction. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11:1201–2196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bontempi L, Vassanelli F, Cerini M, D’Aloia A, Vizzardi E, Gargaro A, et al. Predicting the difficulty of a lead extraction procedure: the LED index. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2014;15:668–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Biefer HR, Hürlimann D, Grünenfelder J, Salzberg SP, Steffel J, Falk V, Starck CT. Generator pocket adhesions of cardiac leads: classification and correlation with transvenous lead extraction results. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2013;36:1111–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Afzal MR, Daoud EG, Matre N, Shoben A, Burnside M, Gilliam C, et al. RIsk Stratification prior to lead Extraction and impact on major intraprocedural complications (RISE protocol). J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30:2453–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kusumoto FM, Schoenfeld MH, Wilkoff BL, Berul CI, Birgersdotter-Green UM, et al. 2017 HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14(12):e503–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Krahn AD, Morissette J, Lahm R, Haddad T, Baxter WW, McVenes R, et al. Radiographic predictors of lead conductor fracture. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7:1070–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ha AC, Vezi BZ, Keren A, Alanazi H, Gollob MH, Green MS, et al. Predictors of fracture risk of a small caliber implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2010;33:437–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Beaser AD, Aziz Z, Besser SA, Jones CI, Jameria Z, Kannan A, et al. Characterization of lead adherence using intravascular ultrasound to assess difficulty of transvenous lead extraction. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13: e007726.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ehieli WL, Boll DT, Marin D, Lewis R, Piccini JP, Hurwitz LM. Use of preprocedural MDCT for cardiac implantable electric device lead extraction: frequency of findings that change management. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208:770–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lewis RK, Pokorney SD, Greenfield RA, Hranitzky PM, Hegland DD, Schroder JN, et al. Preprocedural ECG-gated computed tomography for prevention of complications during lead extraction. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2014;37:1297–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jones SO 4th, Eckart RE, Albert CM, Epstein LM. Large, single-center, single-operator experience with transvenous lead extraction: outcomes and changing indications. Heart Rhythm. 2008;5:520–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Agarwal SK, Kamireddy S, Nemec J, Voigt A, Saba S. Predictors of complications of endovascular chronic lead extractions from pacemakers and defibrillators: a single-operator experience. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2009;20:171–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mazzone P, Tsiachris D, Marzi A, Ciconte G, Paglino G, Sora N, et al. Predictors of advanced lead extraction based on a systematic stepwise approach: results from a high volume center. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2013;36:837–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sood N, Martin DT, Lampert R, Curtis JP, Parzynski C, Clancy J. Incidence and predictors of perioperative complications with transvenous lead extractions: real-world experience with National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018;11: e004768.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Epstein LM, Love CJ, Wilkoff BL, Chung MK, Hackler JW, Bongiorni MG, et al. Superior vena cava defibrillator coils make transvenous lead extraction more challenging and riskier. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:987–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. de Bie MK, Fouad DA, Borleffs CJ, van Rees JB, Thijssen J, Trines SA, et al. Trans-venous lead removal without the use of extraction sheaths, results of >250 removal procedures. Europace. 2012;14:112–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pokorney SD, Parzynski CS, Daubert JP, Hegland DD, Varosy PD, Curtis JP, et al. Temporal trends in and factors associated with use of single- versus dual-coil implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads: data from the NCDR ICD registry. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017;3:612–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hsu JC, Saxon LA, Jones PW, Wehrenberg S, Marcus GM. Utilization trends and clinical outcomes in patients implanted with a single- vs a dual-coil implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead: insights from the ALTITUDE Study. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12(8):1770–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Arrhythmia, Electrophysiology, Pacemaker Research and Management Center, Department of Cardiology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Umuttepe Yerleskesi, İzmit, 41380, Kocaeli, Turkey

    Umut Celikyurt, Burak Acar, Akin Torun, Muzeyyen Karakullukcu, Ahmet Vural & Aysen Agacdiken

  2. Department of Radiology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, İzmit, Kocaeli, Turkey

    Ozgur Cakir

  3. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, İzmit, Kocaeli, Turkey

    Ozgur Baris

Authors
  1. Umut Celikyurt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Burak Acar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Akin Torun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Muzeyyen Karakullukcu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ozgur Cakir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ozgur Baris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ahmet Vural
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Aysen Agacdiken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Umut Celikyurt.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The study was approved by the Local Ethical Committee of the university hospital (2021/193).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Celikyurt, U., Acar, B., Torun, A. et al. Radiographic predictors of failure of simple manual traction of transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads: a single-center experience. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 66, 1341–1347 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-022-01289-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-022-01289-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation