Classification and Surgical Repair of Injuries Sustained During Transvenous Lead Extraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Injuries to cardiac and venous structures during pacemaker and defibrillator lead extraction are serious complications that have been studied poorly. The incidence of these injuries is unknown but likely underestimated. No systematic multicenter review of these injuries or their management has been undertaken. METHODS AND RESULTS: We interrogated our mandatory administrative database for all excimer laser extractions that sustained a cardiac or venous injury in the province of British Columbia. Injuries were classified according to presentation and compared with respect to nature of injury, type of repair, utilization of cardiopulmonary bypass, and outcome. Of 1082 excimer laser extractions over 19 years, 33 sustained an injury (3.0%). The majority of injuries occurred in women (21/33; 63.6%), and median age of oldest lead extracted was 10.8 (7.5, 12.2) years. A type 1 presentation, defined as circulatory collapse, was found in 12/33 patients (36.4%). A type 2 presentation, defined as progressive hypotension responsive to treatment, was found in 20/33 patients (60.6%). Over half the patients had a moderate or large injury, and cardiopulmonary bypass was required in 13 patients with extensive injury. Despite the presence of devastating injuries, the immediate availability of aggressive salvage measures resulted in a survival of 87.9% of patients at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The immediate availability of a cardiovascular surgeon, perfusionist, and cardiopulmonary bypass pump facilitates lifesaving repair of injuries sustained during laser lead extraction. The size and complexity of injury correlates closely with the presentation, blood loss, and need for cardiopulmonary bypass to facilitate repair.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".