ArticleHeart rhythm O22024
Effective and safe mechanical transvenous lead extraction in a low-volume center.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) of cardiac implantable electronic devices was once deemed highly risky by high-volume centers. However, advancements in technology have significantly reduced the risk, making TLE a safer procedure in electrophysiology. Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy and safety of mechanical TLEs in a low-volume center with a single operator. Methods: This study retrospectively accessed electronic medical records from the Tulane University School of Medicine system in New Orleans, Louisiana, and included patients who received mechanical TLE from 2016 to 2023. We analyzed the indications for TLE, patient characteristics, lead characteristics, success rate, and complications. Results: We included 149 consecutive mechanical TLEs with an average implant duration of 105 months. A total of 53.7% (80) of TLEs were indicated for infectious reasons, and 37.6% (56) were high-voltage leads. Clinical success and complete procedural success rates were both 94.6% with no procedure-related mortality or major complications. The periprocedural mortality rate was 1.25% (1). Minor complications included a left chest pocket hematoma, a left groin hematoma, and urinary retention. Conclusion: The efficacy and safety of mechanical TLEs performed in a low-volume center are comparable with those in high-volume centers.
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.