ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2021
Procedural outcome of lead explant and countertraction-assisted femoral lead extraction in Thai patients with cardiac implantable electronic device infection.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Successful Bailout Retrieval of an Active-Fixation Atrial Leadless Pacemaker Following Suspected Tissue Entrapment During Repositioning.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
- Solution for transvenous lead extractions in developing countries.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
- Procedural outcome of lead explant and countertraction-assisted femoral lead extraction in Thai patients with cardiac implantable electronic device infection.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation rate has been increasing worldwide. Despite proper surgical technique and preincisional intravenous antibiotics, the incidence of infected CIED remains high and leads to serious complications. When encountered with CIED infection, complete CIED system removal is indicated. Several lead extraction approaches have shown a high success rate. However, the facilities are limited in Thailand. In our current practice, we perform lead extraction using the Dotter basket snare femoral approach as our primary method. There are no prior data on this countertraction-assisted transfemoral technique. Therefore, we aim to study the procedural outcome of countertraction-assisted transfemoral lead removal technique of CIED infection in Thai patients.
methodsPatients diagnosed with CIED infection and with a history of device infection were retrospectively included. Simple manual removal was performed. In case of failure, we proceeded with the modified countertraction-assisted transfemoral technique.
resultsThere were 35 patients in the study. The success rate was 94.3%. Most of the leads, 62.8%, were removed by simple manual traction. In the 37.1% who required further femoral approach lead extractions, procedural failure was observed in 5.7% and procedure-related adverse events in 5.6%. CIED infection-related death accounted for 5.7% and nosocomial infection-related death, 2.8%.
conclusionThe success rate of CIED infection lead explant and countertraction-assisted transfemoral lead extraction technique was high with small complications and can be performed without advanced facilities. However, the procedure required a main center with a cardiovascular thoracic surgery support team.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.