489 a Rare Case of Lead Extraction

Abstract

Aims Poor data exist about the leadless PM implantation through a bioprosthetic tricuspid valve. Bioprosthetic tricuspid valve has traditionally represented a relative contraindication to transvenous right ventricular pacing for possible tricuspid bioprosthetic valve damage and dysfunction. Therefore, epicardial pacing is usually preferred to transvenous right pacing through a bioprosthetic tricuspid valve for the deleterious effect of permanent pacing leads on tricuspid bioprosthetic valve function and regurgitation. Methods Our case focuses on a 62-year-old woman with mechanical mitral and biological tricuspid prosthesis due to rheumatic disease since 2007 and with a PM-DDDR for a postsurgical complete atrioventricular block. A lead was implanted in right atrium while another lead was implanted in the coronary sinus (CS) instead of in the right ventricle following the presence of a biological tricuspid prosthesis. In February 2022, she did a replacement of pacemaker (PM) generator to another hospital due to initial battery depletion. In March she described pain at the device pocket and consequent appearance of pocket infection. For this situation she was admitted to our cardiac department. A transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was performed and showed normal biventricular size and function (LVEF 55%), normal function of valve prostheses and absence of vegetations both on the valves and atrial lead. Subsequently an angiography was performed and revealed little patency of the anonymous-caval-subclavian left axis. We made a diagnosis of pocket infection and decided to extract leads in March. We proceded through debridement of leads and removal of the PM generator. After placing Spectranetics (Philips) Lead Locking Device n.2 (LLD2) along the 2007 right atrial lead, we removed it through the use of a mechanical extractors (Cook 7-8.5 Fr). Then after placing Spectranetics (Philips)Lead Locking Device E (LLDE), the CS lead was completely removed through the use of a mechanical extractors (Cook 7-8.5 Fr) and specific delivery.The procedure was well tolerated and uneventful. Following the negative result of the post-extraction blood cultures, cultures of lead tips and pocket swab, together with the normalization of inflammation indices (WBC and CRP) and to the end of antibiotic therapy, we decided to reimplant the device.For the presence of valve prostheses and the patient's high infectious risk, we decided to implant a leadless PM. Results At the beginning of April we performed a leadless Micra AV PM implantation through 23-F Micra TPS delivery catheter across a tricuspid bioprosthetic valve in the right ventricular apex instead of the middle septum due to implantation difficulties for the concomitant presence of the bioprosthetic valve. The procedure was well tolerated and uneventful too. She was discharged after 72h in good conditions. Conclusions We present an unusual case of lead extraction for the second infection of the device pocket in a patient with mechanical mitral and biological tricuspid prostheses and a lead in coronary sinus for the presence of biological tricuspid prosthesis. Leadless PM implantation represents a new technology by eliminating the risks connected with the presence of the lead across the bioprosthetic valve.