Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1736532
Removal of Electrophysiological Devices in the Context of Heart Transplantation: Comparison of Combined and Staged Extraction Procedures
Funding None.
Abstract
Background During heart transplantation (HTx), tip of the leads of cardiac implantable electrophysiological devices (CIEPD) has to be cut when resecting the heart. Timing of the removal of the remaining device and leads is still discussed controversially.
Methods Between 2010 and 2021, n = 201 patients underwent HTx, of those n = 124 (61.7%) carried a present CIEPD. These patients were divided on the basis of the time of complete device removal (combined procedure with HTx, n = 40 or staged procedure, n = 84).
Results CIEPD was removed 11.4 ± 6.7 days after the initial HTx in staged patients. Dwelling time, number of leads as well as incidence of retained components (combined: 8.1%, staged: 7.7%, p = 1.00) were comparable between both groups. While postoperative incidence of infections (p = 0.52), neurological events (p = 0.47), and acute kidney injury (p = 0.44) did not differ, staged patients suffered more often from primary graft dysfunction with temporary mechanical assistance (combined: 20.0%, staged: 40.5%, p = 0.03). Consecutively, stay on intensive care unit (p = 0.02) was prolonged and transfusions of red blood cells (p = 0.15) and plasma (p = 0.06) as well as re-thoracotomy for thoracic bleeding complications (p = 0.10) were numerically increased in this group. However, we did not observe any differences in postoperative survival.
Conclusion Presence of CIEPD is common in HTx patients. However, the extraction strategy of CIEPD most likely did not affect postoperative morbidity and mortality except primary graft dysfunction. Especially, retained components, blood transfusions, and infective complications are not correlated to the timing of CIEPD removal.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Authors' Contribution
M.I. contributed toward conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, visualization, writing—original draft, writing—re-view and editing. U.-B. contributed toward conceptualization, data curation, methodology, project administration, resources, supervision, validation, writing—review and editing. K.S. contributed toward data curation, methodology, investigation, validation, writing—review and editing. S.E.-K. worked toward data curation, resources, investigation, validation, writing—review and editing. D.O. contributed toward data curation, resources, investigation, validation, writing—review and editing. H.D. did the data curation, investigation, validation, writing—review and editing. R.W. Data curation, resources, investigation, validation, writing—review and editing. H.A. contributed toward data curation, investigation, validation, writing—review and editing. I.T. contributed to data curation, investigation, validation, writing—review and editing. A.L. contributed toward data curation, methodology, project administration, resources, supervision, validation, writing—review and editing. P.A. contributed toward conceptualization, data curation, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, supervision, validation, writing—review and editing.
Publication History
Received: 23 July 2021
Accepted: 15 September 2021
Article published online:
11 December 2021
© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany