Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Simple leads to complex solutions
Free
  1. Mathew Sheridan1,
  2. Senthil Kirubakaran2
  1. 1Eastbourne District General Hospital, Eastbourne, East Sussex, UK
  2. 2Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mathew Sheridan, mda04mjs{at}gmail.com

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Description

A 76-year-old woman on warfarin for atrial fibrillation presented for routine pacing check 6 weeks after implantation of a dual-chamber device. She felt weak and generally unwell. The atrial lead was not sensing or pacing at high outputs. A chest X-ray showed the lead had perforated the atrial wall (figure 1). Echocardiography showed no pericardial effusion. International normalised ratio was 2.4.

Figure 1

Chest radiograph 6 weeks after device implantation showing the atrial lead has perforated the atrial wall.

In light of these findings, urgent lead revision was planned in a centre with cardiothoracic facilities due to the increased risk of pericardial effusion and tamponade.

Although pacemaker malfunction can be complex, simple non-specialist investigations can elucidate causes and majorly impact management.

Learning points

  • Simple, systematic investigation of unwell patients (with cardiac devices) before specialist input can majorly inform and impact management.

  • Delayed lead perforation is defined as lead perforation more than 30 days after implantation and has a reported incidence of 0.8%.1

  • Although many cases of lead perforation may be asymptomatic,1 prompt recognition (facilitated by simple investigation) may prevent resultant pericardial effusion, tamponade and fistulae.1

Reference

View Abstract

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.