Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 25, 2026

A Two-Step Method for Percutaneous Transhepatic Choledochoscopic Lithotomy
Published on: September 13, 2022
Feasibility and Outcomes of Intravenous Lithotripsy as an Adjunct in Complex Transvenous Lead Extraction
Mohamad Mdaihly1, Joe Demian1, Arshneel S Kochar1
1Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cardiac Electrophysiology and Pacing Section, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Background:
Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) of old leads is associated with increased procedural complexity and risk due to the development of calcified vascular adhesions. This may necessitate additional tools to free the leads. Shockwave intravenous lithotripsy (IVL), which employs acoustic pressure waves to fracture calcified lesions, has emerged as an adjunctive tool in this setting. However, data on its feasibility in TLE remains limited.
Objective:
To evaluate the feasibility of IVL as an adjunctive tool in complex TLE cases, focusing on the extraction tools utilized, fluoroscopy duration, success rates, and associated complications.
Methods:
From a prospectively maintained registry, we analyzed all patients undergoing IVL-assisted TLE at our institution. These patients were matched to controls without IVL using propensity scores derived from baseline and procedural characteristics, including age, sex, infection indication, age of the oldest explanted lead, number of extracted leads, and number of extracted ICD leads. A matching ratio of 1:3 was applied to increase statistical power while maintaining covariate balance.
Results:
A total of 27 IVL-assisted cases were matched to 81 controls. Baseline demographics and comorbidities were well balanced between groups. The mean number of extracted leads and mean age of the oldest extracted lead were comparable (2.44 ± 0.98 vs. 2.49 ± 0.90, p = 0.81; 15.35 ± 5.80 vs. 15.78 ± 8.24 years, p = 0.80). IVL patients demonstrated significantly higher utilization of laser sheaths, either alone (100% vs. 77.7%, p = 0.006) or combined with mechanical tools (44.4% vs. 18.5%, p = 0.008). Median fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in the IVL group (50.2 vs. 15.7 min, p < 0.001). Complete IVL application from the brachiocephalic vein to the superior vena cava was achieved in 20 patients, while 7 were limited by proximal venous stenosis. Procedural and clinical success rates, as well as major and minor complications, were not significantly different between groups.
Conclusion:
We report the largest series on the use of shockwave IVL during complex TLE cases, with significantly higher fluoroscopy and procedure durations. Despite favorable safety and efficacy outcomes, adjunctive IVL did not confer clear clinical benefit, and the complexity of lead removal remained evident.
More Related Videos
06:04Upper-extremity Approach for Secondary Access in Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
Published on: August 8, 2025
13:48Reduction of Radiation Exposure during Endovascular Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Disease Combining Fiber Optic RealShape Technology and Intravascular Ultrasound
Published on: April 21, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Varicose Veins II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care