Skip Navigation

Europace 2001 3(1):56-59; doi:10.1053/eupc.2000.0135
© 2001 by European Society of Cardiology
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (12)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mathur, G.
Right arrow Articles by Sutton, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mathur, G.
Right arrow Articles by Sutton, R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Permanent pacemaker implantation via the femoral vein: an alternative in cases with contraindications to the pectoral approach

G. Mathur, R. H. Stables, D. Heaven, A. Ingram and R. Sutton

Department of Invasive Cardiology and Electrophysiology, Royal Brompton Hospital London, UK

BACKGROUND: This paper presents a consecutive series of permanent pacemakers (PPM) implanted via the femoral vein in patients with contraindications to pacing systems via the superior vena cava (SVC). The femoral vein approach is a less invasive and feasible alternative to epicardial lead placement.

METHODS: Twenty-seven patients had femoral pacemakers inserted. Indications for femoral vein pacemaker insertion were: SVC/subclavian obstruction (12 patients, 44·4%), previous infection in SVC leads (four patients, 14·8%), mastectomy and/or radiotherapy to chest (four patients, 14·8%), multiple leads in SVC (two patients, 7·4%), recurrent erosion (two patients, 7·4%), abnormal anatomy (one patient, 3·7%), painful pacemaker pocket (one patient, 3·7%) and burns (one patient, 3·7%). Fifty-one leads, 25 atrial and 26 ventricular, were inserted. The majority of leads were active fixations (96% of atrial leads and 85% ventricular leads).

RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 36·5 months (range 0·9–116·5), six additional unplanned procedures were performed in four patients. Atrial lead displacement occurred in five leads (20%). There were no ventricular lead displacements. In two patients, box revision for pre-erosion was required. One patient had persistent pain at the site of abdominal pacemaker generator. Infection, thromboembolic events, thromophlebitis, evidence of lower limb venous occlusion and lead fracture did not occur.

CONCLUSION: Femoral vein PPM are a simple and feasible alternative in patients in whom the SVC approach is contraindicated.

Key Words: Permanent pacemaker, implantation, femoral approach


Correspondence: Richard Sutton, Department of Invasive Cardiology and Electrophysiology, Royal Brompton Hospital, Sydney Street, London SW3 6NP, UK. E-mail: rhawthorn{at}rbh.nthames.nhs.uk


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Card Surg AdultHome page
H. M. Spotnitz
Surgical Implantation of Pacemakers and Automatic Defibrillators
Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2008; 3(2008): 1395 - 1428.
[Full Text]


Home page
EuropaceHome page
Z. Yousef, V. Paul, and F. Leyva
Cardiac resynchronization via the femoral vein: a novel method in cases with contraindications to the pectoral approach.
Europace, February 1, 2006; 8(2): 144 - 146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Card Surg AdultHome page
H. M. Spotnitz
Pacemakers and Automatic Defibrillators
Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2003; 2(2003): 1293 - 1326.
[Full Text]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.