5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices With Abandoned Leads

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2017 HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Association of atrial tissue fibrosis identified by delayed enhancement MRI and atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: the DECAAF study.

            Left atrial fibrosis is prominent in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Extensive atrial tissue fibrosis identified by delayed enhancement magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been associated with poor outcomes of AF catheter ablation. To characterize the feasibility of atrial tissue fibrosis estimation by delayed enhancement MRI and its association with subsequent AF ablation outcome. Multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study of patients diagnosed with paroxysmal and persistent AF (undergoing their first catheter ablation) conducted between August 2010 and August 2011 at 15 centers in the United States, Europe, and Australia. Delayed enhancement MRI images were obtained up to 30 days before ablation. Fibrosis quantification was performed at a core laboratory blinded to the participating center, ablation approach, and procedure outcome. Fibrosis blinded to the treating physicians was categorized as stage 1 (<10% of the atrial wall), 2 (≥10%-<20%), 3 (≥20%-<30%), and 4 (≥30%). Patients were followed up for recurrent arrhythmia per current guidelines using electrocardiography or ambulatory monitor recording and results were analyzed at a core laboratory. Cumulative incidence of recurrence was estimated by stage at days 325 and 475 after a 90-day blanking period (standard time allowed for arrhythmias related to ablation-induced inflammation to subside) and the risk of recurrence was estimated (adjusting for 10 demographic and clinical covariates). Atrial tissue fibrosis estimation by delayed enhancement MRI was successfully quantified in 272 of 329 enrolled patients (57 patients [17%] were excluded due to poor MRI quality). There were 260 patients who were followed up after the blanking period (mean [SD] age of 59.1 [10.7] years, 31.5% female, 64.6% with paroxysmal AF). For recurrent arrhythmia, the unadjusted overall hazard ratio per 1% increase in left atrial fibrosis was 1.06 (95% CI, 1.03-1.08; P < .001). Estimated unadjusted cumulative incidence of recurrent arrhythmia by day 325 for stage 1 fibrosis was 15.3% (95% CI, 7.6%-29.6%); stage 2, 32.6% (95% CI, 24.3%-42.9%); stage 3, 45.9% (95% CI, 35.5%-57.5%); and stage 4, 51.1% (95% CI, 32.8%-72.2%) and by day 475 was 15.3% (95% CI, 7.6%-29.6%), 35.8% (95% CI, 26.2%-47.6%), 45.9% (95% CI, 35.6%-57.5%), and 69.4% (95% CI, 48.6%-87.7%), respectively. Similar results were obtained after covariate adjustment. The addition of fibrosis to a recurrence prediction model that includes traditional clinical covariates resulted in an improved predictive accuracy with the C statistic increasing from 0.65 to 0.69 (risk difference of 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.09). Among patients with AF undergoing catheter ablation, atrial tissue fibrosis estimated by delayed enhancement MRI was independently associated with likelihood of recurrent arrhythmia. The clinical implications of this association warrant further investigation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Lead extraction in the contemporary setting: the LExICon study: an observational retrospective study of consecutive laser lead extractions.

              This study sought to examine the safety and efficacy of laser-assisted lead extraction and the indications, outcomes, and risk factors in a large series of consecutive patients. The need for lead extraction has been increasing in direct relationship to the increased numbers of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Consecutive patients undergoing transvenous laser-assisted lead extraction at 13 centers were included. Between January 2004 and December 2007, 1,449 consecutive patients underwent laser-assisted lead extraction of 2,405 leads (20 to 270 procedures/site). Median implantation duration was 82.1 months (0.4 to 356.8 months). Leads were completely removed 96.5% of the time, with a 97.7% clinical success rate whereby clinical goals associated with the indication for lead removal were achieved. Failure to achieve clinical success was associated with body mass index 10 years and when performed in low volume centers. Major adverse events in 20 patients were directly related to the procedure (1.4%) including 4 deaths (0.28%). Major adverse effects were associated with patients with a body mass index or =2.0. Indicators of all-cause in-hospital mortality were pocket infections, device-related endocarditis, diabetes, and creatinine > or =2.0. Lead extraction employing laser sheaths is highly successful with a low procedural complication rate. Total mortality is substantially increased with pocket infections or device-related endocarditis, particularly in the setting of diabetes, renal insufficiency, or body mass index <25 kg/m(2). Centers with smaller case volumes tended to have a lower rate of successful extraction. Copyright 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Cardiology
                JAMA Cardiol
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                2380-6583
                February 17 2021
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Electrophysiology Section, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
                [2 ]Department of Radiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
                Article
                10.1001/jamacardio.2020.7572
                33595595
                6e11d224-5d94-4e4b-84a6-0016846db0f9
                © 2021
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article