Search

Aims: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPM-I) remains nowadays the most important drawback of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedure and the optimal strategy of delayed conduction disturbances (CDs) in these patients is unclear. The study aimed to validate an ambulatory electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring through a 30 s spot ambulatory digital mobile ECG (AeECG), by using KardiaMobile-6L device in a 30-day period after TAVR procedure., Methods and Results: Between March 2021 and February 2022, we consecutively enrolled all patients undergoing TAVR procedure, except pacemaker (PM) carriers. At discharge, all patients were provided of a KardiaMobile-6L device and a spot digital ECG (eECG) recording 1 month schedule. Clinical and follow-up data were collected, and eECG schedule compliance and recording quality were explored. Among 151 patients without pre-existing PM, 23 were excluded for pre-discharge PPM-I, 18 failed the KardiaMobile-6L training phase, and 10 refused the device. Delayed CDs with a Class I/IIa indication for PPM-I occurred in eight patients (median 6 days). Delayed PPM-I vs. non-delayed PPM-I patients were more likely to have longer PR and QRS intervals at discharge. PR interval at discharge was the only independent predictor for delayed PPM-I at multivariate analysis. The overall eECG schedule compliance was 96.5%. None clinical adverse events CDs related were documented using this new AeECG monitoring modality., Conclusion: A strategy of 30 s spot AeECG is safe and efficacious in delayed CDs monitoring after TAVR procedure with a very high eECG schedule level of compliance., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare the long-term clinical and electrical performance of Micra leadless pacemaker with transvenous single-chamber pacemaker (TV-VVI PM) in a high-volume centre for transvenous lead extraction (TLE)., Methods: One-hundred patients (group 1) undergoing Micra implant were matched with 100 patients undergoing TV-VVI PM implant (group 2) by age, sex, left ventricular systolic ejection fraction and previous TLE., Results: The implant procedure was successful in all patients. In group 1, the procedure duration was lower than in group 2 (43.86 ± 22.38 vs 58.38 ± 17.85 min, p < 0.001), while the fluoroscopy time was longer (12.25 ± 6.84 vs 5.32 ± 4.42 min, p < 0.001). There was no difference about the rate of septal implant at the right ventricle (76% vs 86%, p = 0.10). Patients were followed-up for a median of 12 months. No acute and chronic procedure-related complication was observed in group 1, while we reported acute complications in seven patients (7%, p = 0.02) and long-term complications in three patients (3%, p = 0.24), needing for a system revision in 6 cases (6%, p = 0.038), in group 2. One systemic infection occurred in TV-VVI PM group. Electrical measurements were stable during follow-up in both groups, with a longer estimated battery life in group 1 (mean delivered energy at threshold at discharge: 0.14 ± 0.21 vs 0.26 ± 0.22 μJ, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Micra pacemaker implant is a safe and effective procedure, with a lower rate of acute complications and system revisions compared with TV-VVI PM, even in a real-life setting including patients who underwent TLE., (© 2020. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Rates of cardiac pacemaker implantation rise with age, and, meanwhile, elderly patient may be at great risk of complications, as pneumothorax, lead perforation, or pocket dehiscence. The use of leadless pacemaker could overcome peri- and post-procedural complications related to the presence of transvenous leads and pocket. The study aims to investigate feasibility and outcomes of Micra Transcatheter Pacing System (M-TPS) implantation in elderly, which represents a challenge for conventional cardiac pacing. Between May 2014 and July 2019, 109 patients (88 males, mean age 77.71±9.68 years) underwent M-TPS implantation at our Center, targeting a non-apical site of delivery when feasible. Study population was divided into two groups according to age (group 1 <79 years vs group 2 group 2 ≥80 years). The outcome evaluation included electrical performance at hospital discharge, and during follow-up. In 46/109 cases (34 males, 73.91%) M-TPS was implanted in patients older than 80 years. There were no statistically significant differences between groups for demographics characteristics, except for age. The procedure was performed via the right femoral access in 102/109 cases and was successful in all cases, with no device-related events. No differences were observed between groups in procedure duration, single device delivery, electrical performance at implant and at 12 month F-U. MTP-S implant is an effective and safe procedure in elderly patients, with similar electrical performance and outcome compared with younger patients at mid-term follow-up.

Aims: Optimal management of redundant or malfunctioning leads is controversial. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of mechanical transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in patients with abandoned leads., Methods and Results: Consecutive TLE procedures performed in our centre from January 2009 to December 2017 were considered. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of mechanical TLE in patients with abandoned (Group 1) compared to non-abandoned (Group 2) leads. We analysed 1210 consecutive patients that required transvenous removal of 2343 leads. Group 1 accounted for 250 patients (21%) with a total of 617 abandoned leads (26%). Group 2 comprised 960 patients (79%) with 1726 leads (74%). The total number of leads (3.0 vs. 2.0), dwelling time of the oldest lead (108.00 months vs. 60.00 months) and infectious indications for TLE were higher in Group 1. Clinical success was achieved in 1168 patients (96.5%) with a lower rate in Group 1 (90.4% vs. 98.1%; P < 0.001). Major complications occurred in only 9 patients (0.7%), without significant differences among the two groups. The presence of one or more abandoned leads [odds ratio (OR) 3.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-11.19; P = 0.037] and dwelling time of the oldest lead (OR 1.01 for a month; 95% CI 1.01-1.02; P < 0.001) were associated with a higher risk of clinical failure., Conclusion: Transvenous mechanical lead extraction is a safe procedure also in high-risk settings, as patients with abandoned leads. Success rate resulted a bit lower, especially in the presence of abandoned leads with long implantation time., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Managing elderly patients with infection or malfunction deriving from a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) may be challenging. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of mechanical transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in elderly patients., Methods: Patients who had undergone TLE in single tertiary referral center were divided in two groups (group 1: ≥ 80 years; group 2: < 80 years) and their acute and chronic outcomes were compared. All patients were treated with manual traction or mechanical dilatation., Results: Our analysis included 1316 patients (group 1: 202; group 2: 1114 patients), with a total of 2513 leads extracted. Group 1 presented more comorbidities, more pacemakers than implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, whereas the dwelling time of the oldest lead and the number of leads were similar, irrespective of patient's age. In group 1, the radiological success rate for lead was higher (99.0% vs 95.9%; P < .001) and the fluoroscopy time lower (13.0 vs 15.0 min; P = .04) than in group 2. Clinical success was reached in 1273 patients (96.7%), without significant differences between groups (group 1: 98.0% vs group 2: 96.4%; P = .36). Major complications occurred in 10 patients (0.7%) without significative differences between patients with more or less than 80 years (group 1: 1.5% vs group 2: 0.6%; P = .24) and with no procedure-related deaths in elderly group., Conclusions: Mechanical TLE in elderly patients is a safe and effective procedure. In the over-80s, a comparable incidence of major complications with younger patients was observed, with at least a similar efficacy of the procedure., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aims: We aimed at investigating the feasibility and outcome of Micra implant in patients who have previously undergone transvenous lead extraction (TLE), in comparison to naïve patients implanted with the same device., Methods and Results: Eighty-three patients (65 males, 78.31%; 77.27 ± 9.96 years) underwent Micra implant at our centre. The entire cohort was divided between 'post-extraction' (Group 1) and naïve patients (Group 2). In 23 of 83 patients (20 males, 86.96%; 73.83 ± 10.29 years), Micra was implanted after TLE. Indication to TLE was an infection in 15 patients (65.21%), leads malfunction in four (17.39%), superior vena cava syndrome in three (13.05%), and severe tricuspid regurgitation in one case (4.35%). The implant procedure was successful in all patients and no device-related events occurred at follow-up (median: 18 months; interquartile range: 1-24). No differences were observed between groups in fluoroscopy time (13.88 ± 10.98 min vs. 13.15 ± 6.64 min, P = 0.45), single device delivery (Group 1 vs. Group 2: 69.56% vs. 55%, P = 0.22), electrical performance at implant and at 12-month follow-up (Group 1 vs. Group 2: pacing threshold 0.48 ± 0.05 V/0.24 ms vs. 0.56 ± 0.25 V/0.24 ms, P = 0.70; impedance 640 ± 148.83 Ohm vs. 583.43 ± 99.7 Ohm, P = 0.27; and R wave amplitude 10.33 ± 2.88 mV vs. 12.62 ± 5.31 mV, P = 0.40). A non-apical site of implant was achievable in the majority of cases (72.3%) without differences among groups (78.26% vs. 70%; P = 0.42)., Conclusion: Micra implant is an effective and safe procedure in patients still requiring a ventricular pacing after TLE, with similar electrical performance and outcome compared with naïve patients at long-term follow-up., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: To demonstrate the feasibility and long-term performances of a non-apical Micra pacemaker implantation., Methods and Results: Fifty-two consecutive patients underwent Micra implantation, targeting a non-apical site of delivery when feasible. Each patient received a regular follow-up (mean 13 ± 9 months). The first 17 patients were also enrolled in the Micra transcatheter pacing system trial (Group 1); the remaining ones presented broader indications and included post-extraction subjects (Group 2). In 19 of 52 patients (Group 1: 6%, Group 2: 51%; P = 0.002) Micra was implanted because of high-risk characteristics that discouraged the implantation of a traditional pacemaker. In 31 of 52 patients (60%) Micra was implanted in a non-apical location, with a lower rate of single delivery compared with apical sites (48% vs. 81%, P = 0.035), but without any impact on electrical performance. Pacing threshold remained optimal in the majority of patients (94%), regardless of the site of implantation (apical vs. non-apical location: 0.50 vs. 0.52 V/0.24 ms; P = 0.856) and group membership, with only 6% of the subjects showing elevated values (mean 1.92 ± 0.92 V/0.24 ms) at the last follow-up. No device-related adverse events were registered., Conclusion: Micra pacemaker implant is a safe and effective procedure even in a real life cohort of high-risk patients. A non-apical site of implantation is feasible in the majority of patients allowing stable electrical performance at long-term follow-up.

Introduction: Increasing device implantations, patient comorbidities, and longer life expectancy contribute to an increased need for lead extraction. Even if transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is a highly successful procedure, some serious procedural complications are reported. In order to identify those patients who are at higher risk, risk stratification scores were proposed. Areas covered: The major obstacles to lead extractions are represented by the body's response to the foreign implanted material and by the following development of fibrotic reaction between the lead and the vascular system. Several clinical factors and device features are associated with major complications and worse outcomes. Although different multiparametric scores predicting the safety and the efficacy of TLE procedures were reported, none of these scores were prospective evaluated. Expert commentary: A correct risk stratification is needed in order to refer complex patients to centers with proven experience and avoid futile procedures. Furthermore, the identification of high-risk patients allows to perform the extraction procedure in the operating room instead of electrophysiology lab. Albeit some risk scores able to predict adverse event in cardiac lead extraction were described, there are still several limitations to their use and reproducibility.

Leadless pacemaker (LP) technology was recently developed and introduced for clinical purpose as an alternative to traditional systems in order to reduce leads and pocket-related complications. Currently, two self-contained right ventricular pacemakers implanted by using a femoral percutaneous approach have been developed and initial results seem promising. Although the clinical use is still limited to the right ventricular pacing, the LP currently represents a valid and alternative solution in several settings, when the standard pacemaker cannot be used or its use is associated with higher risk of complications. Implementation of particular pacing algorithms in the near future will allow for a VDD pacing mode with only a single ventricular component, whereas the next evolution of technology will lead to develop multicomponent, communicating leadless systems capable to perform a dual-chamber pacing or even a cardiac resynchronization. The management after battery depletion is still controversial and experience on retrievability is anecdotic. Long term data from registry are necessary to reinforce the reliability of these systems in the real life and randomized trials comparing LPs with traditional pacemaker will be essential to better understand if the LP can become a new paradigm in cardiac pacing.