Efficacy of Delivery Catheter for the Right Ventricular Septal Placement of a Defibrillator Lead.

IF 1.3
Hiroyuki Kato, Koudai Yamazaki, Taku Sakurai, Shinji Yamazoe, Kazuhito Tsuzuki, Kazumasa Suga, Tomoyuki Ota, Hisashi Murakami, Kenji Kada, Naoya Tsuboi, Satoshi Yanagisawa, Yasuya Inden, Toyoaki Murohara
{"title":"Efficacy of Delivery Catheter for the Right Ventricular Septal Placement of a Defibrillator Lead.","authors":"Hiroyuki Kato, Koudai Yamazaki, Taku Sakurai, Shinji Yamazoe, Kazuhito Tsuzuki, Kazumasa Suga, Tomoyuki Ota, Hisashi Murakami, Kenji Kada, Naoya Tsuboi, Satoshi Yanagisawa, Yasuya Inden, Toyoaki Murohara","doi":"10.1111/pace.70060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Right ventricular (RV) septal placement of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads has been proposed as an alternative to conventional apical placement. However, optimal techniques for accurate septal defibrillator lead implantation remain to be established.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center, retrospective study analyzed 37 patients with cardiomyopathy who underwent ICD implantation with intended RV septal defibrillator lead placement. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the implantation technique: delivery catheter (n = 7) or stylet system (n = 30). Myocardial current of injury (COI) monitoring was used in the delivery catheter group to guide lead fixation. The lead position was assessed by cardiac computed tomography, and procedural outcomes were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Accurate RV septal lead placement was achieved in 100% of the delivery catheter group compared to 60% in the stylet group (p = 0.047). The delivery catheter group also demonstrated significantly shorter lead implantation time (median 9 vs. 17 min, p = 0.016) and total fluoroscopy time (median 15 vs. 29 min, p = 0.009). Lead parameters and complication rates were comparable. A subclinical pericardial effusion was identified in one patient from the stylet group, in whom the lead was positioned in the RV free wall.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of the delivery catheter with COI monitoring significantly enhanced the accuracy and efficiency of RV septal defibrillator lead implantation without compromising safety. This technique may offer procedural advantages over conventional stylet-based methods in patients with cardiomyopathy. Prospective studies are needed to establish more definitively the usefulness and safety of this approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":520740,"journal":{"name":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.70060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Right ventricular (RV) septal placement of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads has been proposed as an alternative to conventional apical placement. However, optimal techniques for accurate septal defibrillator lead implantation remain to be established.

Methods: This single-center, retrospective study analyzed 37 patients with cardiomyopathy who underwent ICD implantation with intended RV septal defibrillator lead placement. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the implantation technique: delivery catheter (n = 7) or stylet system (n = 30). Myocardial current of injury (COI) monitoring was used in the delivery catheter group to guide lead fixation. The lead position was assessed by cardiac computed tomography, and procedural outcomes were compared.

Results: Accurate RV septal lead placement was achieved in 100% of the delivery catheter group compared to 60% in the stylet group (p = 0.047). The delivery catheter group also demonstrated significantly shorter lead implantation time (median 9 vs. 17 min, p = 0.016) and total fluoroscopy time (median 15 vs. 29 min, p = 0.009). Lead parameters and complication rates were comparable. A subclinical pericardial effusion was identified in one patient from the stylet group, in whom the lead was positioned in the RV free wall.

Conclusion: The use of the delivery catheter with COI monitoring significantly enhanced the accuracy and efficiency of RV septal defibrillator lead implantation without compromising safety. This technique may offer procedural advantages over conventional stylet-based methods in patients with cardiomyopathy. Prospective studies are needed to establish more definitively the usefulness and safety of this approach.

输送导管在右室间隔放置除颤器导联中的疗效。
背景:右室(RV)间隔放置植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)导联已被提议作为传统根尖放置的替代方案。然而,准确的室间隔除颤器导联植入的最佳技术仍有待建立。方法:这项单中心回顾性研究分析了37例心肌病患者,他们接受了ICD植入,并计划放置RV间隔除颤器导联。根据植入方式将患者分为两组:输尿管(n = 7)和导管系统(n = 30)。输尿管组采用心肌损伤电流(COI)监测指导导联固定。通过心脏计算机断层扫描评估导联位置,并比较手术结果。结果:右心室间隔导联的准确放置率为100%,而导管组为60% (p = 0.047)。置管组的导联时间(中位9 vs. 17 min, p = 0.016)和总透视时间(中位15 vs. 29 min, p = 0.009)也显著缩短。导线参数和并发症发生率具有可比性。有一名患者的亚临床心包积液被发现,其中一名患者的铅被放置在右心室游离壁。结论:在不影响安全性的前提下,采用带COI监测的输尿管可显著提高右室间隔除颤器导联植入的准确性和效率。在心肌病患者中,该技术可能比传统的基于风格的方法具有手术优势。需要前瞻性研究来更明确地确定这种方法的有效性和安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信