Background: Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is a valuable tool for monitoring the patient during transvenous lead extraction (TLE), but the direct impact of TEE on the effectiveness and safety of TLE has not yet been documented. Methods: The effectiveness of TLE and short-term survival were compared between two groups of patients: 2106 patients in whom TEE was performed before and after TLE and 1079 individuals in whom continuous TEE monitoring was used. The procedure-related risk of major complications was assessed using a predictive SAFeTY TLE score. Results: The patients monitored by TEE were characterized by older age, more comorbidities and higher SAFeTY TLE scores (6.143 ± 4.395 vs. 5.593 ± 4.127; p = 0.004). Complete procedural success was significantly higher in the TEE-guided group (97.683% vs. 95.442%, p < 0.01). The rate of serious complications in the TEE-guided group was lower than the predictive SAFeTY TLE score—a reduction of 28.75% (p < 0.05). Periprocedural mortality in the TEE-guided and non-TEE-guided groups was zero vs. six deaths (p = 0.186). Short-term survival was comparable between the groups. Conclusions: Transesophageal echocardiography as a monitoring tool during transvenous lead extraction provides valuable results—higher rates of complete procedural success and a reduced risk of the most severe complications, thus preventing periprocedural deaths.

Aims: The usefulness of transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) monitoring for transvenous lead extraction (TLE) procedures is still controversial. The purpose of the current study was to present new TEE values in detecting invisible events in fluoroscopy and preventing the development of dangerous complications. Methods: From 2015 to 2019, a total of 1026 procedures were performed in single TLE center. In total, 1108 leads had been extracted with a mean lead dwell time of 115.8 ± 77.6 months. Continuous TEE was used in 936 patients with a mean age of 67.1 ± 14.4 years. Results: Preprocedure examination revealed looped leads in 181 (19.3%) patients, dry cardiac perforation in 151 (16.1%), lead-to-lead adhesion in 172 (18.4%), lead adhesion to the myocardium in 317 (33.9%), and vegetations in 119 (12.7%) patients.Intra-procedural TEE demonstrated pulling on the atrial wall, ventricular wall, or tricuspid valve in 380 (40.5%), 235 (25.1%), and 78 (8.3%) patients, respectively. Acute tamponade requiring sternotomy occurred in 11 (1.1%) patients. Migration of vegetation or connective tissue fragments were seen in 69 (7.3%) and 111 (11.8%) patients, respectively. After procedure, TEE was helpful in navigating an implantation, a new lead in 97 (10.3%) patients, and removing the remnants of lead/silicone insulation in 50 (5.3%) patients. Conclusion:Real time transesophageal echocardiography for the guidance of transvenous lead extraction informs the operator about the danger of manipulations close to delicate cardiac structures and whether immediate modification to the plan of lead removal is necessary in order to prevent the occurrence of unwanted events. K E Y W O R D S continuous echocardiographic monitoring, transesophageal echocardiography, transvenous lead extraction

Background The constant interaction between intracardiac leads and the heart and veins results in excessive accumulation of fibrous connective tissue around the leads. The extent of this pathological phenomenon, which is visible on transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), and predisposing factors are not well defined. Methods We examined 936 transesophageal echocardiograms prior to transvenous lead extraction (TLE) performed at a high‐volume centre between 2015 and 2019. Results The most important echocardiographic findings were fibrous binding sites between leads and cardiovascular structures, lead‐to‐lead adhesions, excessive lead loops, lead‐dependent tricuspid dysfunction (LDTD), asymptomatic masses on endocardial leads (AMEL) and vegetations. Fibrotic reaction within the walls of the heart and veins correlated with the presence of lead loops (OR = 1.771; p < .01) and lead dwell time (OR = 1.111; p < .001). Women were more likely to have excessive lead loops (OR = 1.639; p < .01), and the occurrence of loops increase with the number of implanted leads (OR = 2.557; p < .001). Heart failure (OR = 4.016; p < .001), lead looping (OR = 2.603; p < .01) and longer cumulative lead dwell time (OR = 1.017; p < .05) increased the likelihood of LDTD. A variety of AMEL were identified in this study, most commonly in patients with older leads (OR = 1.043; p < .001). Conclusions Lead dwell time is the main factor predisposing to the occurrence of most lead‐associated phenomena visualized by TEE in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED). Excessive looping of the lead is an important cause of fibrous binding sites and LDTD. AMEL are frequently detected in CIED patients, and their various forms concurrent with vegetations could represent an evolutionary stage of lead‐associated masses.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), allowing third parties to download articles and share them with others, provided the original work is properly cited, not changed in any way, distributed under the same license, and used for noncommercial purposes only.

Background: Little is known about lead-related venous stenosis/occlusion (LRVSO), and the influence of LRVSO on the complexity and outcomes of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is debated in the literature. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of venograms from 2909 patients who underwent TLE between 2008 and 2021 at a high-volume center. Results: Advanced LRVSO was more common in elderly men with a high Charlson comorbidity index. Procedure duration, extraction of superfluous leads, occurrence of any technical difficulty, lead-to-lead binding, fracture of the lead being extracted, need to use alternative approach and lasso catheters or metal sheaths were found to be associated with LRVSO. The presence of LRVSO had no impact on the number of major complications including TLE-related tricuspid valve damage. The achievement of complete procedural or clinical success did not depend on the presence of LRVSO. Long-term mortality, in contrast to periprocedural and short-term mortality, was significantly worse in the groups with LRSVO. Conclusions: LRVSO can be considered as an additional TLE-related risk factor. The effect of LRVSO on major complications including periprocedural mortality and on short-term mortality has not been established. However, LRVSO has been associated with poor long-term survival.