The Bridge Occlusion Balloon for Venous Angioplasty in Superior Vena Cava Occlusion

Abstract The Bridge Occlusion Balloon is a compliant balloon, specifically designed for temporary Superior vena cava occlusion in case of Superior Vena Cava laceration during lead extraction procedures. We here report the first case, using Bridge Occlusion Ballon for a venous angioplasty in a patient with dysfunctional pacemaker leads and symptomatic Superior Vena Cava occlusion. After successful lead extraction, venography was showing a narrow venous canal. Therefore, venous angioplasty using the Bridge balloon was performed. Especially for high-risk lead extraction cases in patients with Superior Vena Cava stenosis, the Bridge Occlusion Ballon might be used as a combination of a safety-net in case of Superior Vena Cava perforation and for Superior Vena Cava angioplasty.</div

Leads and removal outcomes.

Leads and removal outcomes.</p

Patients’ characteristics.

Patients’ characteristics.</p

The Attain Starfix active fixation extraction mechanism.

The Attain Starfix active fixation extraction mechanism.</p

Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads

<div><p>Background</p><p>Implantation of coronary sinus (CS) leads may be a difficult procedure due to different vein anatomies and a possible lead dislodgement. The mode of CS lead fixation has changed and developed in recent years.</p><p>Objectives</p><p>We compared the removal procedures of active and passive fixation leads.</p><p>Methods</p><p>Between January 2009 and January 2014, 22 patients at our centre underwent CS lead removal, 6 active and 16 passive fixation leads were attempted using simple traction or lead locking devices with or without laser extraction sheaths. Data on procedural variables and success rates were collected and retrospectively analyzed.</p><p>Results</p><p>The mean patient age was 67.2 ± 9.8 years, and 90.9% were male. The indication for lead removal was infection in all cases. All active fixation leads were Medtronic^® Attain StarFix^™ Model 4195 (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA). The mean time from implantation for the active and passive fixation leads was 9.9 ± 11.7 months (range 1.0–30.1) and 48.7 ± 33.6 months (range 5.7–106.4), respectively (p = 0.012). Only 3 of 6 StarFix leads were successfully removed (50%) compared to 16 of 16 (100%) of the passive fixation CS leads (p = 0.013). No death or complications occurred during the 30-day follow-up.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>According to our experience, removal of the Starfix active fixation CS leads had a higher procedural failure rate compared to passive.</p></div

Chest-X-Ray with abandoned LV Lead fragment after extraction failure.

<p>Chest-X-Ray with abandoned LV Lead fragment after extraction failure.</p

Re-implantation status.

<p>Re-implantation status.</p

Video_1_Antegrade axillary arterial perfusion in 3D endoscopic minimally-invasive mitral valve surgery.mp4

BackgroundMinimally-invasive (MIS) mitral valve (MV) surgery has become standard therapy in many cardiac surgery centers. While femoral arterial perfusion is the preferred cannulation strategy in MIS mitral valve surgery, retrograde arterial perfusion is known to be associated with an increased risk for cerebral atheroembolism, particularly in atherosclerosis patients. Therefore, antegrade perfusion may be beneficial in such cases. This analysis aimed to compare outcomes of antegrade axillary vs. retrograde femoral perfusion in the MIS mitral valve surgery.MethodsThis analysis includes 50 consecutive patients who underwent MIS between 2016 and 2020 using arterial cannulation of right axillary artery (Group A) due to severe aortic arteriosclerosis. Perioperative outcomes of the study group were compared with a historical control group of retrograde femoral perfusion (Group F) which was adjusted for age and gender (n = 50). Primary endpoint of the study was in-hospital mortality and perioperative cerebrovascular events.ResultsPatients in group A had a significantly higher perioperative risk as compared to Group F (EuroSCORE II: 3.9 ± 2.5 vs. 1.6 ± 1.5; p = 0.001; STS-Score: 2.1 ± 1.4 vs. 1.3 ± 0.6; p = 0.023). Cardiopulmonary bypass time (group A: 172 ± 46; group F: 178 ± 51 min; p = 0.627) and duration of surgery (group A: 260 ± 65; group F: 257 ± 69 min; p = 0.870) were similar. However, aortic cross clamp time was significantly shorter in group A as compared to group F (86 ± 20 vs. 111 ± 29 min, p ConclusionSelective use of antegrade axillary artery perfusion in patients with systemic atherosclerosis shows similar in-hospital outcomes as compared to lower risk patients undergoing retrograde femoral perfusion. Patients with higher perioperative risk and severe atherosclerosis can be safely treated via the minimally invasive approach with antegrade axillary perfusion.</p