Publication:
Percutaneous Extraction of Transvenous Permanent Pacemaker/Defibrillator Leads - A Single-Center Experience

dc.authorwosidYüksel, Serkan/Jbs-4938-2023
dc.authorwosidAkcay, Murat/A-7829-2018
dc.contributor.authorAkcay, Murat
dc.contributor.authorYuksel, Serkan
dc.contributor.authorIDAkcay, Murat/0000-0002-4610-8514
dc.contributor.authorIDYuksel, Serkan/0000-0001-9501-4568
dc.date.accessioned2025-12-11T01:24:12Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.departmentOndokuz Mayıs Üniversitesien_US
dc.department-temp[Akcay, Murat; Yuksel, Serkan] Ondokuz Mayis Univ, Sch Med, Dept Cardiol, TR-55139 Samsun, Turkiyeen_US
dc.descriptionAkcay, Murat/0000-0002-4610-8514; Yuksel, Serkan/0000-0001-9501-4568en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground and Objectives: The number of cardiac pacemakers being used has increased in recent decades, and this increase has led to a rise in device-related complications, requiring percutaneous device extraction. Our aim was to present our single-center clinical experience in percutaneous lead extractions. Materials and Methods: We analyzed an observational retrospective cohort study of 93 patients for the transvenous removal of a total of 163 endocardial leads. We evaluated the device details, indications, lead characteristics, extraction methods, complications, reimplantation procedure, follow-up data, effectiveness, and safety. Results: Patients' mean age was 68.6 +/- 11.6 years. Lead extraction indications were pocket infection in 33 (35.5%), lead dysfunction in 33 (35.5%), and system upgrade in 21 (23%) cases, and lead endocarditis in 6 (6%) cases. The duration from implantation to extraction time was a detected median of 43 (24-87) months. The most common retracted lead type was the RV defibrillator lead (62%), and the lead fixation type was active for one hundred (61%) patients. A new device was inserted in 74 (80%) patients, and the device type was most commonly a CRT-D (61%). Patients were followed up at a median of 17 (8-36) months, and 18 patients (19%) died at follow-up. Complete procedural success was obtained in 78 (84%) patients, and clinical procedural success was obtained in 83 (89%) patients. Procedural failure was detected in 15 (16%) patients. Major and minor complications were detected in 10 (11%) and 6 (6.5%) patients, respectively. The most common minor complication was pocket hematoma. Conclusions: Our experience suggests that transvenous lead extraction has a high success rate with an acceptable risk of procedural complications. The simple manual traction method has a high rate of procedural success, despite a high dwell time of the lead.en_US
dc.description.woscitationindexScience Citation Index Expanded
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/medicina60081360
dc.identifier.issn1010-660X
dc.identifier.issn1648-9144
dc.identifier.issue8en_US
dc.identifier.pmid39202640
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60081360
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/43457
dc.identifier.volume60en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001305286700001
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMDPIen_US
dc.relation.ispartofMedicina-Lithuaniaen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectTransvenous Lead Extractionen_US
dc.subjectIndicationsen_US
dc.subjectOutcomesen_US
dc.subjectSingle-Center Experienceen_US
dc.titlePercutaneous Extraction of Transvenous Permanent Pacemaker/Defibrillator Leads - A Single-Center Experienceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files