title: Extraction of superfluous device leads: A comparison with removal of infected leads.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Although increasingly more lead extraction was performed for superfluous leads, the extraction of such leads remains controversial.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The objective of this study was to determine the outcomes and complications of transvenous extraction of superfluous leads in a single center in the era of laser technology.
  
  
  METHODS
  Four hundred eighty transvenous lead extraction procedures performed from January 2001 through October 2012 at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota) were retrospectively reviewed. Of these, 123 procedures were performed for superfluous functional or nonfunctional leads. Data were collected from electronic medical records and an institutional database of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 167 superfluous leads (mean [SD] lead duration 53 [53] months; median 34 months) were removed during the 123 procedures. Forty-one percent of procedures were for lead malfunction. The procedural complete-success rate was 96.7%. Major complications occurred in 1 patient (0.8%), who had a superior vena cava tear that required thoracotomy. Superfluous leads had been implanted for a shorter period of time than infected leads (mean [SD] 53 [53] vs 81 [59] months; P < .001). The procedural complete-success rate was higher for the removal of superfluous leads than for leads associated with infection (97% vs 92%; P = .05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Transvenous extraction of superfluous leads is highly successful, with few procedural complications. Extraction of superfluous leads at the time of device upgrade or lead revision is considered reasonable to avoid the increasing risk of extraction complications with lead aging.
authors: Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China; Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
authors: Xin-Miao
authors: XM
authors: Huang
authors: Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Henan Provincial People's Hospital, Zhengzhou University, Henan, China.
authors: Haixia
authors: H
authors: Fu
authors: Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
authors: Michael J
authors: MJ
authors: Osborn
authors: Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
authors: Samuel J
authors: SJ
authors: Asirvatham
authors: Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
authors: Christopher J
authors: CJ
authors: McLeod
authors: Davidai Arrhythmia Center, Heart Center, Sheba Medical Center And Tel Aviv University, Tel Hashomer, Israel.
authors: Michael
authors: M
authors: Glickson
authors: Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
authors: Nancy G
authors: NG
authors: Acker
authors: Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
authors: Paul A
authors: PA
authors: Friedman
authors: Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Electronic address: ycha@mayo.edu.
authors: Yong-Mei
authors: YM
authors: Cha
mesh_terms: D017147:Defibrillators, Implantable / Q000009:adverse effects; D020878:Device Removal / Q000379:methods; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007239:Infections / Q000150:complications; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010138:Pacemaker, Artificial / Q000009:adverse effects; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014261:Tricuspid Valve / Q000502:physiology
keywords: Cardiovascular implantable electronic device; Complication; Lead extraction; Outcome; Tricuspid regurgitation