Outcomes of lead extraction without subsequent device reimplantation

Mohammed A. Al-Hijji, Ammar M. Killu, Omid Yousefian, David O. Hodge, Jae Yoon Park, Shrinivas Hebsur, Abdallah El Sabbagh, Victor G. Pretorius, Michael John Ackerman, Paul Andrew Friedman, Ulrika Birgersdotter-Green, Yong-Mei Cha

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aims Outcomes among patients who do not receive device reimplantation after cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) extraction have not been well studied. The present study aims to investigate the outcomes of patients without device reimplantation after lead extraction and device removal. Methods and results We retrospectively searched for consecutive patients who underwent CIED extraction at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN and University of California San Diego Medical Center from 2001 through 2012. Among the patients identified, we compared characteristics of those who did and did not have device reimplantation. The Kaplan - Meier survival was analysed. Among 678 patients, 97 patients had their device extracted without reimplantation during 1-year follow-up ('noreimplant group'). Median age was younger in the no-reimplant group (60.7 vs. 70.6 years; P , 0.001). The reasons for no reimplantation were as follows: no longer meeting criteria for CIED (48%), inappropriate device indication at initial implantation (23%), patient preference (17%), and unresolved device complications (12%). Three major arrhythmias were reported in the no-reimplant group. Overall survival in the no-reimplant group was significantly lower than in the reimplant group (60 vs. 93%; P , 0.001). Ongoing device-related complications [hazard ratio (HR), 3.91; 95% CI, 1.74 - 8.81; P = 0.001], infection (HR, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.24 - 7.52; P = 0.02), and concurrent dialysis (HR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.12 - 6.71; P = 0.03) were associated with increased mortality. Of 31 deaths in the no-reimplant group, 1 was secondary to cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusion Fourteen per cent of patients who had device extraction did not undergo reimplantation mainly because they no longer met CIED indications. The high mortality in these patients is related to device complications and comorbid conditions, whereas mortality associated with arrhythmia is rare.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1527-1534
Number of pages8
JournalEuropace
Volume19
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Replantation
Equipment and Supplies
Cardiac Arrhythmias
Lead
Mortality
Device Removal
Survival
Patient Preference
Dialysis

Keywords

  • CIED
  • Device extraction
  • Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Al-Hijji, M. A., Killu, A. M., Yousefian, O., Hodge, D. O., Park, J. Y., Hebsur, S., ... Cha, Y-M. (2017). Outcomes of lead extraction without subsequent device reimplantation. Europace, 19(9), 1527-1534. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euw184

Outcomes of lead extraction without subsequent device reimplantation. / Al-Hijji, Mohammed A.; Killu, Ammar M.; Yousefian, Omid; Hodge, David O.; Park, Jae Yoon; Hebsur, Shrinivas; El Sabbagh, Abdallah; Pretorius, Victor G.; Ackerman, Michael John; Friedman, Paul Andrew; Birgersdotter-Green, Ulrika; Cha, Yong-Mei.

In: Europace, Vol. 19, No. 9, 2017, p. 1527-1534.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Al-Hijji, MA, Killu, AM, Yousefian, O, Hodge, DO, Park, JY, Hebsur, S, El Sabbagh, A, Pretorius, VG, Ackerman, MJ, Friedman, PA, Birgersdotter-Green, U & Cha, Y-M 2017, 'Outcomes of lead extraction without subsequent device reimplantation', Europace, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 1527-1534. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euw184
Al-Hijji MA, Killu AM, Yousefian O, Hodge DO, Park JY, Hebsur S et al. Outcomes of lead extraction without subsequent device reimplantation. Europace. 2017;19(9):1527-1534. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euw184
Al-Hijji, Mohammed A. ; Killu, Ammar M. ; Yousefian, Omid ; Hodge, David O. ; Park, Jae Yoon ; Hebsur, Shrinivas ; El Sabbagh, Abdallah ; Pretorius, Victor G. ; Ackerman, Michael John ; Friedman, Paul Andrew ; Birgersdotter-Green, Ulrika ; Cha, Yong-Mei. / Outcomes of lead extraction without subsequent device reimplantation. In: Europace. 2017 ; Vol. 19, No. 9. pp. 1527-1534.
@article{05f84ab6d16046218f887708c5b8105e,
title = "Outcomes of lead extraction without subsequent device reimplantation",
abstract = "Aims Outcomes among patients who do not receive device reimplantation after cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) extraction have not been well studied. The present study aims to investigate the outcomes of patients without device reimplantation after lead extraction and device removal. Methods and results We retrospectively searched for consecutive patients who underwent CIED extraction at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN and University of California San Diego Medical Center from 2001 through 2012. Among the patients identified, we compared characteristics of those who did and did not have device reimplantation. The Kaplan - Meier survival was analysed. Among 678 patients, 97 patients had their device extracted without reimplantation during 1-year follow-up ('noreimplant group'). Median age was younger in the no-reimplant group (60.7 vs. 70.6 years; P , 0.001). The reasons for no reimplantation were as follows: no longer meeting criteria for CIED (48{\%}), inappropriate device indication at initial implantation (23{\%}), patient preference (17{\%}), and unresolved device complications (12{\%}). Three major arrhythmias were reported in the no-reimplant group. Overall survival in the no-reimplant group was significantly lower than in the reimplant group (60 vs. 93{\%}; P , 0.001). Ongoing device-related complications [hazard ratio (HR), 3.91; 95{\%} CI, 1.74 - 8.81; P = 0.001], infection (HR, 3.06; 95{\%} CI, 1.24 - 7.52; P = 0.02), and concurrent dialysis (HR, 2.74; 95{\%} CI, 1.12 - 6.71; P = 0.03) were associated with increased mortality. Of 31 deaths in the no-reimplant group, 1 was secondary to cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusion Fourteen per cent of patients who had device extraction did not undergo reimplantation mainly because they no longer met CIED indications. The high mortality in these patients is related to device complications and comorbid conditions, whereas mortality associated with arrhythmia is rare.",
keywords = "CIED, Device extraction, Mortality",
author = "Al-Hijji, {Mohammed A.} and Killu, {Ammar M.} and Omid Yousefian and Hodge, {David O.} and Park, {Jae Yoon} and Shrinivas Hebsur and {El Sabbagh}, Abdallah and Pretorius, {Victor G.} and Ackerman, {Michael John} and Friedman, {Paul Andrew} and Ulrika Birgersdotter-Green and Yong-Mei Cha",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1093/europace/euw184",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "1527--1534",
journal = "Europace",
issn = "1099-5129",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Outcomes of lead extraction without subsequent device reimplantation

AU - Al-Hijji, Mohammed A.

AU - Killu, Ammar M.

AU - Yousefian, Omid

AU - Hodge, David O.

AU - Park, Jae Yoon

AU - Hebsur, Shrinivas

AU - El Sabbagh, Abdallah

AU - Pretorius, Victor G.

AU - Ackerman, Michael John

AU - Friedman, Paul Andrew

AU - Birgersdotter-Green, Ulrika

AU - Cha, Yong-Mei

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Aims Outcomes among patients who do not receive device reimplantation after cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) extraction have not been well studied. The present study aims to investigate the outcomes of patients without device reimplantation after lead extraction and device removal. Methods and results We retrospectively searched for consecutive patients who underwent CIED extraction at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN and University of California San Diego Medical Center from 2001 through 2012. Among the patients identified, we compared characteristics of those who did and did not have device reimplantation. The Kaplan - Meier survival was analysed. Among 678 patients, 97 patients had their device extracted without reimplantation during 1-year follow-up ('noreimplant group'). Median age was younger in the no-reimplant group (60.7 vs. 70.6 years; P , 0.001). The reasons for no reimplantation were as follows: no longer meeting criteria for CIED (48%), inappropriate device indication at initial implantation (23%), patient preference (17%), and unresolved device complications (12%). Three major arrhythmias were reported in the no-reimplant group. Overall survival in the no-reimplant group was significantly lower than in the reimplant group (60 vs. 93%; P , 0.001). Ongoing device-related complications [hazard ratio (HR), 3.91; 95% CI, 1.74 - 8.81; P = 0.001], infection (HR, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.24 - 7.52; P = 0.02), and concurrent dialysis (HR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.12 - 6.71; P = 0.03) were associated with increased mortality. Of 31 deaths in the no-reimplant group, 1 was secondary to cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusion Fourteen per cent of patients who had device extraction did not undergo reimplantation mainly because they no longer met CIED indications. The high mortality in these patients is related to device complications and comorbid conditions, whereas mortality associated with arrhythmia is rare.

AB - Aims Outcomes among patients who do not receive device reimplantation after cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) extraction have not been well studied. The present study aims to investigate the outcomes of patients without device reimplantation after lead extraction and device removal. Methods and results We retrospectively searched for consecutive patients who underwent CIED extraction at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN and University of California San Diego Medical Center from 2001 through 2012. Among the patients identified, we compared characteristics of those who did and did not have device reimplantation. The Kaplan - Meier survival was analysed. Among 678 patients, 97 patients had their device extracted without reimplantation during 1-year follow-up ('noreimplant group'). Median age was younger in the no-reimplant group (60.7 vs. 70.6 years; P , 0.001). The reasons for no reimplantation were as follows: no longer meeting criteria for CIED (48%), inappropriate device indication at initial implantation (23%), patient preference (17%), and unresolved device complications (12%). Three major arrhythmias were reported in the no-reimplant group. Overall survival in the no-reimplant group was significantly lower than in the reimplant group (60 vs. 93%; P , 0.001). Ongoing device-related complications [hazard ratio (HR), 3.91; 95% CI, 1.74 - 8.81; P = 0.001], infection (HR, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.24 - 7.52; P = 0.02), and concurrent dialysis (HR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.12 - 6.71; P = 0.03) were associated with increased mortality. Of 31 deaths in the no-reimplant group, 1 was secondary to cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusion Fourteen per cent of patients who had device extraction did not undergo reimplantation mainly because they no longer met CIED indications. The high mortality in these patients is related to device complications and comorbid conditions, whereas mortality associated with arrhythmia is rare.

KW - CIED

KW - Device extraction

KW - Mortality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030532866&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85030532866&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/europace/euw184

DO - 10.1093/europace/euw184

M3 - Article

C2 - 27707785

AN - SCOPUS:85030532866

VL - 19

SP - 1527

EP - 1534

JO - Europace

JF - Europace

SN - 1099-5129

IS - 9

ER -