Similar indications but different methods: Should there be a consensus on optimal lead extraction techniques?

PACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

Volumn 25, Issue 7, 2002, Pages 1019-1022

  Tyers, G Frank O ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b NONE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANISOTROPY; CORONARY CARE UNIT; EDITORIAL; ENDOCARDIUM; EXTRACTION; HEART PACING; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; PACEMAKER; PACEMAKER ELECTRODE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SUPERIOR CAVA VEIN OBSTRUCTION; SURGERY; TREATMENT INDICATION; VASCULAR DISEASE; ARTIFICIAL HEART PACEMAKER; DEVICE REMOVAL; ELECTRODE; EQUIPMENT; METHODOLOGY; NOTE;

DEVICE REMOVAL; ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; HUMANS; PACEMAKER, ARTIFICIAL;

EID: 0036315286     PISSN: 01478389     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1460-9592.2002.01019.x     Document Type: Editorial

References (10)

1. Pacemaker infection
2. Infections of nonthoracotomy ICD leads, a note of caution
3. Complications due to abandoned noninfected pacemaker leads
4. Five-year experience with intravascularlead extraction
5. Lead extraction methods
6. Ventricular arrhythmia following thermal damage of epicardial tissue: Possible causes and clinical implications
7. A bipolar electrosurgical dissection sheath for lead extraction
8. Pacemaker lead extraction with needle's eye snare for counter-traction via a femoral approach
9. Noninstrumental pacemaker and defibrillator lead removal. The importance of rotation forces
10. Extraction of pacemaker and ICD leads: Patient and lead characteristics in relation to the requirement of extraction tools