Clinical significance of incidentally detected lead perforations by computed tomography. Issue 5 (9th April 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bhatia, Prerana; Chiou, Tommy; Svennberg, Emma; Khoche, Swapnil; Jacobs, Kathleen; Pollema, Travis; Pretorius, Victor; Birgersdotter‐Green, Ulrika
• Is Part Of: Pacing and clinical electrophysiology. Volume 44:Issue 5(2021)
• Page Start: 936
• Page End: 942
• Publication Date: 2021-04-09
• Subjects: computed tomography -- delayed lead perforations -- lead extraction; Cardiac pacing -- Periodicals; Electrophysiology -- Periodicals; 617.4120645
• DOI: 10.1111/pace.14229
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0147-8389

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Computed tomography (CT) has an established role in detecting perforation of implanted pacemaker and defibrillator leads. The clinical significance of incidental finding of delayed lead perforation remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of lead perforation as detected by CT in a cohort of patients undergoing transvenous laser lead extraction and characterize the association between finding of incidental lead perforation with periprocedural outcomes. Methods: Consecutive patients that underwent chest CT and lead extraction were retrospectively assessed for presence of lead perforation. A total of 143 patients and 348 leads were assessed. The finding of lead perforation was correlated with findings from peri‐procedural transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and outcomes of the lead extraction procedure. Results: Lead perforations (including perforations <5 mm and ≥5 mm) were detected in 66 (46%) patients and 73 (21%) leads. Lead perforation ≥5 mm were less common and detected in 13 (9%) of patients and 14 (4%) of leads. There was no significant difference in the rates of peri‐procedural death, cardiac avulsion, cardiac tamponade or post‐extraction pericardial effusion in patients with and without lead perforation. Conclusions: Incidental delayed lead perforations detected by CT are common and do not correlate with significant TEE findings or adverse peri‐procedural outcomes in patients undergoing lead extraction. Larger studies are needed to further characterize the frequency and safety of these findings.