Pacemaker and Internal Cardioverter Defibrillator Lead Extraction: A Safe and Effective Surgical Approach

Background Need for pacemaker or internal cardioverter defibrillator lead removal is increasing. Removal can be dangerous, difficult, or unsuccessful. Methods We retrospectively reviewed our results and the techniques we used in 365 patients from 1992 through 2009 for successful complete removal of leads and complications. Various techniques of extraction were analyzed for effectiveness and complications. The eras before (1992 to 1999) and after the availability of laser sheath extraction (2000 to 2009) are compared. Results Of 365 patients who underwent transvenous lead extraction, of which 235 were infected, and 130 had lead removal for noninfectious indication. Staphylococcus aureus was the infecting organism in 40%, and coagulase-negative Staphylococcus occurred in 33%. One-half of the organisms were methicillin resistant. Preimplant risk factors for infection included more than one device implant procedure in 105 (47%), preimplant Coumadin therapy (Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ) in 74 (31%), and hemodialysis in 9 (4%). Laser extraction became available in 2000. The era with the availability of laser extraction was associated with a better complete extraction rate (93% vs 89.55%) a lower bleeding rate (1.9% vs 3.1%), and complete extraction without the additional use of femoral workstation extraction tools. Mortality was 1.1%. No death was due to device removal. All deaths were the result of severe preoperative and continuing postextraction sepsis. Conclusions A lead extraction protocol that included procedures done in an operating room environment allowing rapid, open intervention for bleeding, a varied choice of extraction tools, arterial line monitoring, transesophageal echocardiography, general anesthesia, and an experienced team yielded complete extraction in more than 90% of patients, with a low complication rate and no procedurally related deaths.