Inadvertent defibrillator lead placement into the left ventricle after MitraClip implantation: A case report. Issue 19 (May 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Santarpia, Giuseppe; Passafaro, Francesco; Pasceri, Eugenia; Mongiardo, Annalisa; Curcio, Antonio; Indolfi, Ciro
• Other Names: NA. section editor.
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 97:Issue 19(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-05
• Subjects: lead extraction -- lead malposition -- left ventricle -- mitral regurgitation; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000010733
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract: Rationale: Inadvertent pacemaker/defibrillator lead placement into the left ventricle is an unusual cardiac device-related complication and its diagnosis is not always easy and often misunderstood. Thromboembolic events are frequently associated with this procedural complication. Percutaneous lead extraction should be performed when diagnosis is made early after device implantation while long-life oral anticoagulation is a wise option when the diagnosis is delayed and the lead is not removed. Patient concerns: A 65-year-old man affected by dilated cardiomyopathy, previously treated with a percutaneous mitral valve repair, with 2 MitraClip devices, and later with dual chamber cardioverter/defibrillator implantation, returned in outpatient clinics 2 months after discharge for deterioration of dyspnea; transthoracic echocardiography revealed that the shock lead had been accidentally placed in the apex of the left ventricle. Diagnoses: The unintentional lead malposition through the iatrogenic atrial septal defect and its presence into the mitral valve orifice, together with the 2 clip devices implanted, generated an acceleration of transvalvular diastolic flow, determining a moderate stenosis of the mitral valve, as well as promoting a worsening of the degree of valvular regurgitation. Interventions: Oral anticoagulation therapy was started and a mechanical lead extraction was percutaneously performed. A new defibrillator lead was later appropriately positioned in the apex of the right ventricle. Outcomes: The patient was discharged 3 days after intervention and the follow-up, performed 1 month after discharge, was uneventful. Lessons: Complex interventional procedures and implantation of multiple devices can increase procedural troubles and the risk of mechanical complications related to pacemaker/defibrillator implantation. Careful observation of the QRS complex morphology on the electrocardiogram (ECG), during paced rhythm, and the achievement of the echocardiographic examination, in the postprocedural phase, allow an early diagnosis of lead malposition.