BACKGROUND: Lead-related venous stenosis and occlusion can complicate the insertion or replacement of transvenous leads in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED). A possible solution is to tunnel the lead from the contralateral vasculature to the ipsilateral generator. Procedural complications and long term outcomes remain unclear with this technique.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess outcomes of tunneled transvenous leads.
METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent transvenous CIED lead tunneling to a contralateral pocket at our institution between 2014 and 2024. Clinical characteristics, indications for lead implant, post-operative complications and long-term outcomes were collected.
RESULTS: We identified 27 patients underwent transvenous lead tunneling at our institution. Most patients were males (74%) with an average age of 68.8 ± 18.3 years old. Most patients had non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (59%) with an average ejection fraction of 29.3 ± 11.3 %. The tunneled leads were coronary sinus leads (20), followed by defibrillator leads (5) and RV pacing leads (2). Implants were primarily for device upgrade (18), lead revisions (8), or de-novo lead placement (1). No post-operative complications were seen. Patients were followed for an average of 2.2 ± 1.4 years. One tunneled defibrillator lead (3.7%) had low shock impedance 3 years after implant which was monitored and did not require an intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ipsilateral venous occlusion, contralateral lead tunneling appears to be an effective and safe approach to manage CIED patients with occluded ipsilateral subclavian veins.

Cardiac implantable electronic device infection in the context of corynebacterial bloodstream infection (BSI) remains poorly understood. From 2012 to 2023 at Mayo Clinic, 4 of 12 patients with corynebacterial BSI had cardiac implantable electronic device infection: 1 patient was diagnosed during a relapsing BSI episode. Undefined source, persistent BSI, and the presence of a prosthetic cardiac valve were common characteristics.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The current standard of practice for cremating patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is surgical explantation prior to cremation to mitigate the risk of device explosion. This surgery may conflict with patient or family beliefs, whereas cremation of CIEDs may create occupational hazards.
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to establish an ex-vivo model for screening CIED behavior during cremation.
METHODS: Seven CIED underwent testing including projectile/sound testing, impact testing, and gas analysis. In the projectile test, devices were heated until thermal failure (explosion) and filmed with a high-speed camera and microphone. For impact testing, brick structures were built to assess damage after explosion. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry identified released gases. Findings were compared with occupational health standards, where available.
RESULTS: The implantable loop recorder and leadless pacemaker produced minimal kinetic energy and impact risk with thermal failure. The remaining devices demonstrated explosive disintegration at thermal temperatures <500°C. The pacemakers and implantable cardiac defibrillators produced sound levels >120 dB and resulted in damage to brick structures. Small quantities of benzene and hydrogren fluoride were produced but at quantities within acceptable occupational exposure limits in a cremation chamber.
CONCLUSIONS: All tested CIEDs experienced explosion at temperatures below crematorium standards. The smallest devices produced minimal risk of damage or injury suggesting they may safely remain in situ during cremation, while the larger devices produced more kinetic energy, testing chamber damage, and louder explosions suggesting potential risk with cremation. Cadaveric testing in full-sized cremation chambers is required to determine real-world risk.

UNASSIGNED: Venous spasm is an important reason for complicated or failed implantations of cardiac implantable electronic devices. Prevention or risk reduction of venous spasm during cardiac implantable electronic device implantation may be achieved by ultrasound or fluoroscopic imaging prior to puncture, cephalic vein cut-down, sufficient pre- and perioperative hydration, nitroglycerin injection and effective sedation, and analgesia.
UNASSIGNED: This case report with literature review focuses on venous spasm as a potential cause for complicated implantations of cardiac implantable electronic devices. The case report is clinically relevant as it describes a progressive spasm affecting the axillary and the subclavian vein. A 66-year-old female complained of symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) and atypical atrial flutter despite interventional and medical treatment. As an ultimate treatment, she was scheduled for pacemaker implantation and atrioventricular node ablation. Several puncture attempts of the axillary vein failed. Despite venous blood aspiration, no guidewires could be advanced into the axillary vein. We performed a first venogram revealing significant spasm of the axillary vein. Another failed venous puncture occurred after change of access site to the subclavian vein. A second venogram displayed progression of the spasm, now affecting both the axillary and the subclavian veins. Normal saline perfusion was administered as well as intravenous isosorbide. Unfortunately, a repeated venogram after 15 min waiting time showed persistence of the spasm, still affecting both veins. The procedure was discontinued as the patient became uncomfortable. Venous spasm is an important reason for complicated or failed implantations of cardiac implantable electronic devices. Commonly used medical prevention and treatment are intravenous fluids and nitroglycerin. Prevention or risk reduction of venous spasm during cardiac implantable electronic device implantation may be achieved by ultrasound or fluoroscopic imaging prior to puncture, cephalic vein cut-down, sufficient pre- and perioperative hydration, nitroglycerin injection and effective sedation and analgesia.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Despite their improved safety, a majority of cardiac electrophysiology procedures, including catheter ablation (CA), are presently performed in hospital outpatient departments.
OBJECTIVE: This large multicenter study investigated the safety and outcomes associated with various cardiac electrophysiology procedures performed at 6 ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), primarily during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic under the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospitals Without Walls program.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes from consecutive electrophysiology procedures performed in ASCs with same-day discharge, including transesophageal echocardiography, cardioversion, cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, electrophysiology studies, and CA for atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter (AFL)/supraventricular tachycardia, ventricular premature complexes (VPCs), and atrioventricular node.
RESULTS: Altogether, 4037 procedures were performed, including 779 transesophageal echocardiography/cardioversion procedures (19.3%), 1453 CIED implantation procedures (36.0%), 26 electrophysiology studies (0.6%), and 1779 CA procedures (44.1%) for AF (75.4%), AFL/supraventricular tachycardia (18.8%), VPC (4.7%), and atrioventricular node (1.1%). Overall, 80.2% of CA procedures were for left-sided atrial arrhythmias (AF/atypical AFL) requiring transseptal catheterization. Left-sided VPC ablation procedures (42.2%) were performed using a transseptal/retrograde approach. Adverse event rates were low, but comparable between CIED and CA (0.76% vs 0.73%; P = .93), as were the incidences of urgent/unplanned postprocedure hospitalization (0.48% vs 0.45%; P = .89), respectively. Moreover, the adverse event rates in ASCs vs hospital outpatient departments did not differ for CIED (0.76% vs 0.65%; P = .71) or CA (0.73% vs 0.80%; P = .79).
CONCLUSIONS: The results from this large multicenter study suggest that ASCs represent a safe and effective setting to perform a variety of cardiac electrophysiology procedures including CA. These findings bear important implications for health care delivery and policy.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is generally considered a safe procedure, albeit not without risks. While gender-based disparities have been noted in short-term outcomes following TLE, a notable gap exists in understanding the long-term consequences of this procedure. The objective of this analysis was to investigate sex differences in both acute and long-term outcomes among patients who underwent TLE at a tertiary referral center.
METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive patients who underwent TLE between January 2014 and January 2016 were enrolled. The primary outcome comprised a composite of all-cause mortality and need for repeated TLE procedures. Secondary outcomes included fluoroscopy time, lead extraction techniques, success rates, and major and minor complications. Results were compared between female and male cohorts.
RESULTS: The study population comprised 191 patients (median age, 70 years), 29 (15.2%) being women and 162 men (84.8%). Study groups had similar baseline characteristics. Complete procedural success was achieved in 189 out of 191 patients (99.0%), with no significant difference observed between the two groups (p = .17). No major complications were reported in the total cohort. However, there was a significantly higher incidence of minor complications in women compared to men (17.2% vs. 2.5%, p < .01). Following a median follow-up of 6.5 years, the incidence of the primary composite outcome occurred similarly between the study groups (log-rank p = .68).
CONCLUSIONS: Women who underwent TLE exhibited a significantly higher incidence of minor acute intra- and peri-procedural complications than men. However, no differences in long-term outcomes between genders were observed.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) complications present significant challenges in clinical practice, especially in elderly patients with multiple comorbidities. Common adverse events include infection, lead malfunction, and device migration. Twiddler\'s Syndrome, a rare but serious CIED complication characterised by patient manipulation causing lead displacement and device malfunction, is often underreported. The literature consists mainly of case reports and small series, providing limited guidance on prevention and management. As CIEDs are critical for managing cardiac arrhythmias and heart failure, understanding and addressing Twiddler\'s Syndrome is essential. This case report aims to contribute to the literature by detailing a case of Twiddler\'s Syndrome, emphasising the importance of a multidisciplinary approach for optimal management.
METHODS: A 59-year-old male presented with discomfort around his implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) site and the sternal area over the past two days. He denied pain, dyspnoea, or dizziness. Clinical examination revealed a normal heart rhythm and no peripheral pulse deficit. Ultrasound revealed a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. The atrial lead was not visible, and the shock coil was misplaced. ICD interrogation showed inappropriate shocks due to sensing artifacts and exit block in both leads, with no arrhythmias detected. An X-ray confirmed lead dislodgement and significant entanglement in the pocket. The patient was diagnosed with Twiddler\'s Syndrome and scheduled for surgical revision.
CONCLUSIONS: Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), characterised by left ventricular dilatation and dysfunction, accounts for a significant proportion of systolic heart failure cases. Despite advancements in heart failure management, DCM patients remain at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD), making ICD implantation crucial. However, CIED placement carries risks of complications, including Twiddler\'s Syndrome. This condition can lead to lead dislodgement and device malfunction, resulting in inappropriate shocks and potential patient harm. In this case, a single-session extraction and re-implantation were successfully performed using a multidisciplinary approach, emphasising the importance of comprehensive management strategies to address such complications effectively. Regular follow-up showed no adverse events, highlighting the procedure\'s success and the potential benefits of using advanced antimicrobial adjuncts to prevent infections. This case underscores the need for awareness and standardised protocols for managing Twiddler\'s Syndrome to improve patient outcomes in the growing population of CIED recipients.