Long- and short-term outcomes after transvenous lead extraction in a large single-centre patient cohort using the clinical frailty scale as a risk assessment tool
- PMID: 38992492
- PMCID: PMC11480838
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ipej.2024.07.001
Long- and short-term outcomes after transvenous lead extraction in a large single-centre patient cohort using the clinical frailty scale as a risk assessment tool
Abstract
Background and aims: The rate of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations and the need for transvenous lead extraction (TLE) are growing worldwide. This study examined a large Swedish cohort with the aim of identifying possible predictors of post-TLE mortality with special focus on systemic infection patients and frailty.
Methods: This was a single centre study. Records of patients undergoing TLE between 2010 and 2018 were analysed. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare baseline characteristics of patients with different indications and identify risk factors of 30-day and 1-year mortality.
Results: A total of 893 patients were identified. Local infection was the dominant indication and pacemaker was the most common CIED. The mean age was 65 ± 16 years, 73 % were male and median follow-up was 3.9 years. Heart failure was the most common comorbidity. Patients with systemic infection were significantly older, frailer and had significantly higher levels of comorbidities. 30-day mortality and 1-year mortality rates were 2.5 % and 9.9 %, respectively. Systemic infection and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were independently associated with 30-day and 1-year mortality. Clinical frailty scale (CFS) 5-7 correlated independently with 1-year mortality in the entire cohort and specifically in systemic infection patients. CKD, cardiac resynchronization therapy and CFS 5-7 were significant risk factors for long-term mortality (death >1 year after TLE) in multivariable analysis.
Conclusions: Systemic infection, kidney failure in addition to the novel parameter of frailty were associated with post-TLE all-cause mortality. These risk factors should be considered during pre-procedure risk stratification to improve post-TLE outcomes.
Keywords: Cardiac implantable electronic devices; Frailty; Infection; Lead management; Transvenous lead extraction.
Copyright © 2024 Indian Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Figures


Similar articles
-
Mortality after transvenous lead extraction: A risk prediction model for sustainable care delivery.Eur J Clin Invest. 2023 Jun;53(6):e13969. doi: 10.1111/eci.13969. Epub 2023 Feb 21. Eur J Clin Invest. 2023. PMID: 36776121
-
Procedural outcome & risk prediction in young patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction-a GALLERY subgroup analysis.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Sep 6;10:1251055. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1251055. eCollection 2023. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023. PMID: 37745113 Free PMC article.
-
Transvenous Lead Extraction: Outcomes From a Single Centre Providing a National Service for New Zealand.Heart Lung Circ. 2023 Sep;32(9):1115-1121. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2023.05.001. Epub 2023 Jun 2. Heart Lung Circ. 2023. PMID: 37271619
-
A Systematic Review of Short-Term Outcomes of Leadless Pacemaker Implantation After Transvenous Lead Removal of Infected Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device.Am J Cardiol. 2023 Sep 15;203:444-450. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.07.071. Epub 2023 Aug 3. Am J Cardiol. 2023. PMID: 37542954
-
Prognostic value of renal failure in patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction: single centre experience and systematic review of the literature.Expert Rev Med Devices. 2022 Nov;19(11):905-913. doi: 10.1080/17434440.2022.2151360. Epub 2022 Nov 28. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2022. PMID: 36416046
References
-
- Voigt A., Shalaby A., Saba S. Continued rise in rates of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections in the United States: temporal trends and causative insights. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2010;33(4):414–419. - PubMed
-
- Greenspon A.J., Patel J.D., Lau E., Ochoa J.A., Frisch D.R., Ho R.T., et al. 16-year trends in the infection burden for pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in the United States 1993 to 2008. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(10):1001–1006. - PubMed
-
- Kusumoto F.M., Schoenfeld M.H., Wilkoff B.L., Berul C.I., Birgersdotter-Green U.M., Carrillo R., et al. 2017 HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14(12):e503–e551. - PubMed
-
- Bongiorni M.G., Burri H., Deharo J.C., Starck C., Kennergren C., Saghy L., et al. 2018 EHRA expert consensus statement on lead extraction: recommendations on definitions, endpoints, research trial design, and data collection requirements for clinical scientific studies and registries: endorsed by APHRS/HRS/LAHRS. Europace. 2018;20(7):1217. - PubMed
-
- Glikson M., Nielsen J.C., Kronborg M.B., Michowitz Y., Auricchio A., Barbash I.M., et al. 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(35):3427–3520. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources