Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
. 2021 May 6;9(13):3157-3162.
doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i13.3157.

Successful upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy for cardiac implantation-associated left subclavian vein occlusion: A case report

Jin-Yan Zhong  1 , Xiao-Wei Zheng  2 , Heng-Dong Li  3 , Long-Fu Jiang  1
Affiliations
Case Reports

Successful upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy for cardiac implantation-associated left subclavian vein occlusion: A case report

Jin-Yan Zhong et al. World J Clin Cases. .

Abstract

Background: Subclavian vein stenosis or occlusion may be caused by a transvenous pacemaker, which makes the reimplantation of a new pacemaker lead difficult. Transvenous pacemaker lead implantation-related subclavian vein occlusion may present difficulty with regard to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) upgrade.

Case summary: We report the case of a 46-year-old man who was admitted with total subclavian vein occlusion caused by a permanent pacemaker that had been implanted 2 years previously. We successfully treated this patient with an upgrade to a CRT pacemaker by utilizing transferable interventional coronary and radiological techniques. The patient recovered uneventfully during the follow-up period.

Conclusion: CRT upgrade is still a viable technique for the treatment of subclavian vein obstruction caused by previous pacemaker implantation.

Keywords: Cardiac resynchronization; Case report; Pacemaker; Radiological techniques; Subclavian vein obstruction; Therapy; Venoplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Venogram showing complete occlusion of the left subclavian vein.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker procedure. A: Proximally cut lead portions and a Radifocus guidewire tip were fixed with a suture, and the rest of the wire was covered by a Finecross catheter; B: The atrial lead tip captured in a goose-neck snare was positioned in the right atrium; C: The atrial lead was placed in the 8 French femoral vein sheath and removed from the right femoral vein; D: The balloon was dilated across the occlusion in the left subclavian vein; E and F: Intra-procedure fluoroscopy showed the location of the lead of the cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kirkfeldt RE, Johansen JB, Nohr EA, Jørgensen OD, Nielsen JC. Complications after cardiac implantable electronic device implantations: an analysis of a complete, nationwide cohort in Denmark. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1186–1194. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Laurent G, Ricolfi F, Wolf JÉ. Venous stenting as a treatment for pacemaker-induced superior vena cava syndrome. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2013;106:624–626. - PubMed
    1. Spittell PC, Hayes DL. Venous complications after insertion of a transvenous pacemaker. Mayo Clin Proc. 1992;67:258–265. - PubMed
    1. Worley SJ. Implant venoplasty: dilation of subclavian and coronary veins to facilitate device implantation: indications, frequency, methods, and complications. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2008;19:1004–1007. - PubMed
    1. Madkaiker AN, Krishna N, Jose R, Balasubramoniam KR, Murukan P, Baquero L, Varma PK. Superior Vena Cava Syndrome Caused by Pacemaker Leads. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101:2358–2361. - PubMed

Publication types