Cargando…

Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads

BACKGROUND: Implantation of coronary sinus (CS) leads may be a difficult procedure due to different vein anatomies and a possible lead dislodgement. The mode of CS lead fixation has changed and developed in recent years. OBJECTIVES: We compared the removal procedures of active and passive fixation l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pecha, Simon, Kennergren, Charles, Yildirim, Yalin, Gosau, Nils, Aydin, Ali, Willems, Stephan, Treede, Hendrik, Reichenspurner, Hermann, Hakmi, Samer
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4847909/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27119368
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153651
_version_ 1782429280855130112
author Pecha, Simon
Kennergren, Charles
Yildirim, Yalin
Gosau, Nils
Aydin, Ali
Willems, Stephan
Treede, Hendrik
Reichenspurner, Hermann
Hakmi, Samer
author_facet Pecha, Simon
Kennergren, Charles
Yildirim, Yalin
Gosau, Nils
Aydin, Ali
Willems, Stephan
Treede, Hendrik
Reichenspurner, Hermann
Hakmi, Samer
author_sort Pecha, Simon
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Implantation of coronary sinus (CS) leads may be a difficult procedure due to different vein anatomies and a possible lead dislodgement. The mode of CS lead fixation has changed and developed in recent years. OBJECTIVES: We compared the removal procedures of active and passive fixation leads. METHODS: Between January 2009 and January 2014, 22 patients at our centre underwent CS lead removal, 6 active and 16 passive fixation leads were attempted using simple traction or lead locking devices with or without laser extraction sheaths. Data on procedural variables and success rates were collected and retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 67.2 ± 9.8 years, and 90.9% were male. The indication for lead removal was infection in all cases. All active fixation leads were Medtronic(®) Attain StarFix(™) Model 4195 (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA). The mean time from implantation for the active and passive fixation leads was 9.9 ± 11.7 months (range 1.0–30.1) and 48.7 ± 33.6 months (range 5.7–106.4), respectively (p = 0.012). Only 3 of 6 StarFix leads were successfully removed (50%) compared to 16 of 16 (100%) of the passive fixation CS leads (p = 0.013). No death or complications occurred during the 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: According to our experience, removal of the Starfix active fixation CS leads had a higher procedural failure rate compared to passive.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4847909
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48479092016-05-07 Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads Pecha, Simon Kennergren, Charles Yildirim, Yalin Gosau, Nils Aydin, Ali Willems, Stephan Treede, Hendrik Reichenspurner, Hermann Hakmi, Samer PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Implantation of coronary sinus (CS) leads may be a difficult procedure due to different vein anatomies and a possible lead dislodgement. The mode of CS lead fixation has changed and developed in recent years. OBJECTIVES: We compared the removal procedures of active and passive fixation leads. METHODS: Between January 2009 and January 2014, 22 patients at our centre underwent CS lead removal, 6 active and 16 passive fixation leads were attempted using simple traction or lead locking devices with or without laser extraction sheaths. Data on procedural variables and success rates were collected and retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 67.2 ± 9.8 years, and 90.9% were male. The indication for lead removal was infection in all cases. All active fixation leads were Medtronic(®) Attain StarFix(™) Model 4195 (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA). The mean time from implantation for the active and passive fixation leads was 9.9 ± 11.7 months (range 1.0–30.1) and 48.7 ± 33.6 months (range 5.7–106.4), respectively (p = 0.012). Only 3 of 6 StarFix leads were successfully removed (50%) compared to 16 of 16 (100%) of the passive fixation CS leads (p = 0.013). No death or complications occurred during the 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: According to our experience, removal of the Starfix active fixation CS leads had a higher procedural failure rate compared to passive. Public Library of Science 2016-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4847909/ /pubmed/27119368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153651 Text en © 2016 Pecha et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pecha, Simon
Kennergren, Charles
Yildirim, Yalin
Gosau, Nils
Aydin, Ali
Willems, Stephan
Treede, Hendrik
Reichenspurner, Hermann
Hakmi, Samer
Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads
title Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads
title_full Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads
title_fullStr Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads
title_full_unstemmed Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads
title_short Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads
title_sort coronary sinus lead removal: a comparison between active and passive fixation leads
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4847909/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27119368
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153651
work_keys_str_mv AT pechasimon coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads
AT kennergrencharles coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads
AT yildirimyalin coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads
AT gosaunils coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads
AT aydinali coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads
AT willemsstephan coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads
AT treedehendrik coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads
AT reichenspurnerhermann coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads
AT hakmisamer coronarysinusleadremovalacomparisonbetweenactiveandpassivefixationleads