AimsAn estimated 10 000–15 000 pacemaker and implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) leads are extracted annually worldwide using specialized tools that disrupt encapsulating fibrous tissue. Additional information is needed regarding the safety of the devices that have been approved for lead extraction. The aim of this study was to determine whether complications due to device-assisted lead extraction might be more hazardous than published data suggest, and whether procedural safety precautions are effective.Methods and resultsWe searched the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Manufacturers and User Defined Experience (MAUDE) database from 1995 to 2008 using the search terms ‘lead extraction and death’ and ‘lead extraction and injury’. Additional product specific searches were performed for the terms ‘death’ and ‘injury’. Between 1995 and 2008, 57 deaths and 48 serious cardiovascular injuries associated with device-assisted lead extraction were reported to the FDA. Owing to underreporting, the FDA database does not contain all adverse events that occurred during this period. Of the 105 events, 27 deaths and 13 injuries occurred in 2007–2008. During these 2 years, 23 deaths were linked with excimer laser or mechanical dilator sheath extractions. The majority of deaths and injuries involved ICD leads, and most were caused by lacerations of the right atrium, superior vena cava, or innominate vein. Overall, 62 patients underwent emergency surgical repair of myocardial perforations and venous lacerations and 35 (56%) survived.ConclusionThese findings suggest that device-assisted lead extraction is a high-risk procedure and that serious complications including death may not be mitigated by emergency surgery. However, skilled standby cardiothoracic surgery is essential when performing pacemaker and ICD lead extractions. Although the incidence of these complications is unknown, the results of our study imply that device-assisted lead extractions should be performed by highly qualified physicians and their teams in specialized centres.

No abstract

Background-Therapeutic hypothermia (TH) improves survival and confers neuroprotection in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), but TH is underutilized, and regional systems of care for OHCA that include TH are needed. Methods and Results-The Cool It protocol has established TH as the standard of care for OHCA across a regional network of hospitals transferring patients to a central TH-capable hospital. Between February 2006 and August 2009, 140 OHCA patients who remained unresponsive after return of spontaneous circulation were cooled and rewarmed with the use of an automated, noninvasive cooling device. Three quarters of the patients (nϭ107) were transferred to the TH-capable hospital from referring network hospitals. Positive neurological outcome was defined as Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2 at discharge. Patients with non-ventricular fibrillation arrest or cardiogenic shock were included, and patients with concurrent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (nϭ68) received cardiac intervention and cooling simultaneously. Overall survival to hospital discharge was 56%, and 92% of survivors were discharged with a positive neurological outcome. Survival was similar in transferred and nontransferred patients. Non-ventricular fibrillation arrest and presence of cardiogenic shock were associated strongly with mortality, but survivors with these event characteristics had high rates of positive neurological recovery (100% and 89%, respectively). A 20% increase in the risk of death (95% confidence interval, 4% to 39%) was observed for every hour of delay to initiation of cooling. Conclusions-A comprehensive TH protocol can be integrated into a regional ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction network and achieves broad dispersion of this essential therapy for OHCA. (Circulation. 2011;124:206-214.)

No abstract

No abstract