Left hemothorax resulting from delayed right ventricular apical pacing lead perforation without hemopericardium, a case report. (April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Topoluk, Natasha; Kieffer, Hannah; Sutter, Heather; Fayn, Evgueni; Pagel, Paul S.; Almassi, G. Hossein
• Is Part Of: International journal of surgery case reports. Volume 93(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-04
• Subjects: Pacemaker lead -- Hemothorax -- Hemopericardium -- Cardiac perforation; Surgery -- Periodicals; Surgical Procedures, Operative -- Periodicals; Surgery; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2022.106924
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2210-2612

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction and importance: Right ventricular pacemaker lead perforation is a rare but well documented complication of pacemaker implantation. Lead perforation can cause an array of symptoms ranging from none to hemodynamic instability and tamponade. In previously reported cases, lead perforation has always been able to be confirmed by imaging, with computed tomography (CT) scan considered to be the gold standard diagnostic imaging modality. Case presentation: An 80-year-old male underwent uncomplicated implantation of a dual chamber pacemaker for sick sinus syndrome as an outpatient. Thirty-nine days later, the patient presented to the emergency department complaining of new-onset, left-sided, pleuritic chest pain. He was found to have unilateral hemothorax and abnormal pacemaker lead interrogation. Pacemaker lead perforation was suspected but not confirmed with imaging. Lead perforation was only identified after surgical exploration. Clinical discussion: This patient had multiple risk factors for pacemaker lead perforation. However, imaging, including CT scan was unable to confirm perforation. The presence of an otherwise unexplained left hemothorax strongly suggested that surgical intervention was indicated. The lead perforation was subsequently confirmed with subxiphoid exploration of the pericardial space. The mechanism of lead perforation resulting in hemothorax in this case is not straight forward, as no direct communication between the pericardial and pleural spaces was identified. However, previously described visceral pericardial self-sealing may contribute to the small pericardial accumulation described herein. Conclusion: This patient's presentation and clinical course underscore the importance of maintaining a high index of suspicion for pacemaker lead perforation despite a lack of confirmation with imaging. Highlights: Cardiac perforation by pacing lead results in hemopericardium. Isolated hemothorax from lead perforation without hemopericardium is highly unusual. Computed tomography is the most sensitive diagnostic imaging test. CT imaging can be inconclusive in delayed lead perforation. Surgical exploration is required in select cases of delayed RV perforation.