Usefulness of right ventriculography compared with computed tomography for ruling out the possibility of lead perforation before lead extraction
Open Access
- 4 March 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 16 (3), e0245502
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245502
Abstract
Purpose High-risk patients can be identified by preprocedural computed tomography (CT) before lead extraction. However, CT evaluation may be difficult especially for lead tip identification due to artifacts in the leads. Selective right ventriculography (RVG) may enable preprocedural evaluation of lead perforation. We investigated the efficacy of RVG for identifying right ventricular (RV) lead perforation compared with CT in patients who underwent lead extraction. Methods Ninety-five consecutive patients who were examined by thin-section non-ECG-gated multidetector CT and RVG before lead extraction were investigated retrospectively. Newly recognized pericardial effusion after lead extraction was used as a reference standard for lead perforation. We analyzed the prevalence of RV lead perforation diagnosed by each method. The difference in the detection rates of lead perforation by RVG and CT was evaluated. Results Of the 115 RV leads in the 95 patients, lead perforation was diagnosed for 35 leads using CT, but the leads for 29 (83%) of those 35 leads diagnosed as lead perforation by CT were shown to be within the right ventricle by RVG. Three patients with 5 leads could not be evaluated by CT due to motion artifacts. The diagnostic accuracies of RVG and CT were significantly different (p < 0.001). There was no complication of pericardial effusion caused by RV lead extraction. Conclusion RVG for identification of RV lead perforation leads to fewer false-positives compared to non-ECG-gated CT. However, even in cases in which lead perforation is diagnosed, most leads may be safely extracted by transvenous lead extraction.This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Late asymptomatic atrial lead perforation, a fortuitous finding during lead extraction using thoracoscopic surveillance: a case report and review of the literatureEP Europace, 2016
- Recommendations for Cardiac Chamber Quantification by Echocardiography in Adults: An Update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular ImagingEuropean Heart Journal – Cardiovascular Imaging, 2015
- Preprocedural ECG‐Gated Computed Tomography for Prevention of Complications during Lead ExtractionPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2014
- Radiographic and electrocardiography-gated noncontrast cardiac CT assessment of lead perforation: Modality comparison and interobserver agreementJournal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, 2014
- Outcomes of Lead Revision for Myocardial Perforation After Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device PlacementJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 2014
- Transvenous removal of pacing and implantable cardiac defibrillating leads using single sheath mechanical dilatation and multiple venous approaches: high success rate and safety in more than 2000 leadsEuropean Heart Journal, 2008
- Lead Perforation: Incidence in RegistriesPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2007
- Right Ventricular Perforation with an ICD Defibrillation Lead Managed by Surgical Revision and Epicardial Leads—Case ReportsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2007
- Prevalence and Characterization of Asymptomatic Pacemaker and ICD Lead Perforation on CTPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2007
- Delayed Lead Perforation: A Disturbing TrendPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2005