儿童和年轻人的铅提取:何时是更换铅/系统的最佳时机?

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Pediatric Cardiology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-28 DOI:10.1007/s00246-023-03320-9
Andrzej Kutarski, Maria Miszczak-Knecht, Monika Brzezinska, Mariusz Birbach, Wojciech Lipiński, Wojciech Jacheć, Bettina Ziaja, Anna Polewczyk, Łukasz Tułecki, Marek Czajkowski, Dorota Nowosielecka, Katarzyna Bieganowska
{"title":"儿童和年轻人的铅提取:何时是更换铅/系统的最佳时机?","authors":"Andrzej Kutarski, Maria Miszczak-Knecht, Monika Brzezinska, Mariusz Birbach, Wojciech Lipiński, Wojciech Jacheć, Bettina Ziaja, Anna Polewczyk, Łukasz Tułecki, Marek Czajkowski, Dorota Nowosielecka, Katarzyna Bieganowska","doi":"10.1007/s00246-023-03320-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The best strategy for lead management in children is a matter of debate, and our experiences are limited. This is a retrospective single-center study comparing difficulties and outcomes of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) implanted ich childhood and at age < 19 years (childhood-implanted-childhood-extracted, CICE) and at age < 19 (childhood-implanted-adulthood-extracted, CIAE). CICE patients-71 children (mean age 15.1 years) as compared to CIAE patients (114 adults (mean age 28.61 years) were more likely to have VVI than DDD pacemakers. Differences in implant duration (7.96 vs 14.08 years) appeared to be most important, but procedure complexity and outcomes also differed between the groups. Young adults with cardiac implantable electronic device implanted in childhood had more risk factors for major complications and underwent more complex procedures compared to children. Implant duration was significantly longer in CIAE patients than in children, being the most important factor that had an impact on patient safety and procedure complexity. CIAE patients were more likely to have prolonged operative duration and more complex procedures due to technical problems, and they were 2-3 times more likely to require second-line or advanced tools compared to children, but the rates of clinical and procedural success were comparable in both groups. The difference between the incidence of major complications between CICE and CIAE patients is very clear (MC 2.9 vs 7.0%, hemopericardium 1.4 vs 5.3% etc.), although statistically insignificant. Delay of lead extraction to adulthood seems to be a riskier option than planned TLE in children before growing up.</p>","PeriodicalId":19814,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"61-71"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11753338/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lead Extraction in Children and Young Adults: When is the Best Time for Lead/System Replacement?\",\"authors\":\"Andrzej Kutarski, Maria Miszczak-Knecht, Monika Brzezinska, Mariusz Birbach, Wojciech Lipiński, Wojciech Jacheć, Bettina Ziaja, Anna Polewczyk, Łukasz Tułecki, Marek Czajkowski, Dorota Nowosielecka, Katarzyna Bieganowska\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00246-023-03320-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The best strategy for lead management in children is a matter of debate, and our experiences are limited. This is a retrospective single-center study comparing difficulties and outcomes of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) implanted ich childhood and at age < 19 years (childhood-implanted-childhood-extracted, CICE) and at age < 19 (childhood-implanted-adulthood-extracted, CIAE). CICE patients-71 children (mean age 15.1 years) as compared to CIAE patients (114 adults (mean age 28.61 years) were more likely to have VVI than DDD pacemakers. Differences in implant duration (7.96 vs 14.08 years) appeared to be most important, but procedure complexity and outcomes also differed between the groups. Young adults with cardiac implantable electronic device implanted in childhood had more risk factors for major complications and underwent more complex procedures compared to children. Implant duration was significantly longer in CIAE patients than in children, being the most important factor that had an impact on patient safety and procedure complexity. CIAE patients were more likely to have prolonged operative duration and more complex procedures due to technical problems, and they were 2-3 times more likely to require second-line or advanced tools compared to children, but the rates of clinical and procedural success were comparable in both groups. The difference between the incidence of major complications between CICE and CIAE patients is very clear (MC 2.9 vs 7.0%, hemopericardium 1.4 vs 5.3% etc.), although statistically insignificant. Delay of lead extraction to adulthood seems to be a riskier option than planned TLE in children before growing up.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pediatric Cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"61-71\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11753338/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pediatric Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00246-023-03320-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00246-023-03320-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

儿童铅管理的最佳策略是一个有争议的问题,我们的经验是有限的。这是一项回顾性单中心研究,比较了儿童期和成年期经静脉铅提取(TLE)植入的困难和结果
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Lead Extraction in Children and Young Adults: When is the Best Time for Lead/System Replacement?

Lead Extraction in Children and Young Adults: When is the Best Time for Lead/System Replacement?

The best strategy for lead management in children is a matter of debate, and our experiences are limited. This is a retrospective single-center study comparing difficulties and outcomes of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) implanted ich childhood and at age < 19 years (childhood-implanted-childhood-extracted, CICE) and at age < 19 (childhood-implanted-adulthood-extracted, CIAE). CICE patients-71 children (mean age 15.1 years) as compared to CIAE patients (114 adults (mean age 28.61 years) were more likely to have VVI than DDD pacemakers. Differences in implant duration (7.96 vs 14.08 years) appeared to be most important, but procedure complexity and outcomes also differed between the groups. Young adults with cardiac implantable electronic device implanted in childhood had more risk factors for major complications and underwent more complex procedures compared to children. Implant duration was significantly longer in CIAE patients than in children, being the most important factor that had an impact on patient safety and procedure complexity. CIAE patients were more likely to have prolonged operative duration and more complex procedures due to technical problems, and they were 2-3 times more likely to require second-line or advanced tools compared to children, but the rates of clinical and procedural success were comparable in both groups. The difference between the incidence of major complications between CICE and CIAE patients is very clear (MC 2.9 vs 7.0%, hemopericardium 1.4 vs 5.3% etc.), although statistically insignificant. Delay of lead extraction to adulthood seems to be a riskier option than planned TLE in children before growing up.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pediatric Cardiology
Pediatric Cardiology 医学-小儿科
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
258
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The editor of Pediatric Cardiology welcomes original manuscripts concerning all aspects of heart disease in infants, children, and adolescents, including embryology and anatomy, physiology and pharmacology, biochemistry, pathology, genetics, radiology, clinical aspects, investigative cardiology, electrophysiology and echocardiography, and cardiac surgery. Articles which may include original articles, review articles, letters to the editor etc., must be written in English and must be submitted solely to Pediatric Cardiology.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信