RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Traction force that can be applied to an extraction rail is based on lead tensile strength, a product of its construction. A strong rail allows safe advancement of the extraction sheath. This study expands previous work providing strategies to optimize INGEVITY rail strength. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to measure forces that leads encounter in a simulated extraction procedure, determine lead response, and develop extraction recommendations for INGEVITY, INGEVITY+, and FINELINE II lead families. METHODS: Leads were positioned in a simulated right atrial appendage implant. Subsequent traction forces enabled evaluation of lead tensile strength and effectiveness of preparation/extraction techniques. RESULTS: Significant findings include (1) preserving the lead terminal pin did not decrease lead tensile strength and typically maximized it; (2) the weakest region is between the cathode and anode; (3) mid lead scar increases traction force tolerance until that scar is removed; and (4) optimal rail strength was observed using a multivenous approach with a femoral snare. Unique lead family findings include increased tensile strength of FINELINE II polyurethane vs silicone and INGEVITY active fixation vs passive fixation. CONCLUSION: This study teaches the implanting clinician there are specific extraction techniques available to improve the removal of leads that may be the best option for a patient's clinical needs. Bench testing demonstrates that lead construction drives lead behavior during an extraction. Preserving the lead terminal pin provides consistent and, in most cases, optimal rail strength. If clinically indicated, a multivenous approach using a femoral snare significantly increases rail strength and protects the vulnerable lead tip.
