Landing

Lead management devices and extraction

Take the lead. Advance patient care.

Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) patients are at the core of what you do. Our lead management devices allow safe and effective extraction of CIED leads, providing improved outcomes for patients.

Philips is dedicated to helping physicians and patients manage every lead – safely, responsibly, predictably.

Demonstrated results in lead management devices and extraction

84%

Of patients with a noninfectious indication for lead extraction are capped6, leading to increased risk for infection9, higher risk future extraction10, contraindication for MRI11, and increased venous burdens.3,12,13

97.7%

Clinical success rate of laser lead extraction15

88.2%

Recent innovations have significantly advanced  lead extraction. Proper use of the Philips Bridge occlusion balloon has contributed to increased SVC tear survival rates from 56.4% to 88.2%14

Standard Product Image GlideLight

GlideLight laser sheath

Safely and efficiently removing leads depends on tools that give you versatility and control. GlideLight laser sheath offers the unprecedented ability to customize the laser’s repetition rate throughout a procedure. At 80 Hz, the GlideLight laser sheath requires up to 55% less advancement force,1 and advances up to 62% more efficiently through tough binding sites than SLS II.2

Standard Product Image TightRail

TightRail mechanical rotating dilator sheath

With TightRail, flexibility meets unparalleled control. The tool’s flexible shaft helps physicians remain coaxial to the lead while maintaining forward progression through tortuous vasculature. The dilating blade remains shielded until activated, putting physicians in control and allowing counter-traction at the targeted lead’s distal tip.

Picture Bridge Occlusion Balloon

Bridge occlusion balloon

A tear in the superior vena cava (SVC) during a lead extraction procedure is rare, occurring in just 0.5% of cases.3 But when a tear does occur, the Bridge occlusion balloon can be quickly deployed to stop blood loss and allow time for transition to surgical repair.4

We are always interested in engaging with you.

Let us know how we can help.

1
Select your area of interest
2
Contact details

GlideLight laser sheath important safety information


The GlideLight laser sheath is intended for use with other lead extraction tools in patients who are suitable candidates for removal of implanted pacemaker and defibrillator leads. The use of the GlideLight laser sheath may be unsafe in some patients, or with certain leads, or when the leads cannot be extracted through the superior veins (that is, when groin or surgical extraction is required). Rarely a patient undergoing lead extraction may require urgent surgical treatment for a complication; therefore, patients should not undergo lead extraction with a laser sheath in centers where emergency surgical procedures cannot be performed. Leads not intended for extraction may be damaged during the procedure and may require replacement. Ask your doctor if you are a candidate for lead extraction with the GlideLight Laser Sheath.
 
Potential minor adverse events associated with lead extraction procedures that may or may not require medical or surgical treatment include: a tear or damage to the blood vessels, the heart or its structures; bleeding at the surgical site; or collapsed lung. Rare but serious adverse events that require emergency medical or surgical procedures may include: a tear or damage to the blood vessels, the heart, lungs or their structures; blood clot or obstruction of the blood vessels or lungs by debris or lead fragments. Other serious complications may include: irregular heartbeat, weakened heart muscle, infection, respiratory failure or complications associated with anesthesia, stroke or death. This information is not intended to replace a discussion with your healthcare provider on the benefits and risks of this procedure to you.


[1] Pokorney SD, Zepel L, Greiner MA, et al. Lead Extraction and Mortality Among Patients With Cardiac Implanted Electronic Device Infection. JAMA Cardiol. Published online October 18, 2023. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2023.3379
[2] Margey, R. et al. Contemporary management of and outcomes from cardiac device related infections Europace (2010) 12 (1): 64-70 first published online November 11, 2009 doi:10.1093/europace/eup362
[3] Sohail, M. et al. (2014). Laser lead extraction to facilitate cardiac implantable electronic device upgrade and revision in the presence of central venous obstruction. Europace, 16(1), 81-87.
[4] Wazni O, Epstein LM, Carrillo RG, et al. Lead extraction in the contemporary setting: the LExICon study: an observational retrospective study of consecutive laser lead extractions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(6):579-586.
[5] Bongiorni MG, Kennergren C, Butter C, et al. The European Lead Extraction ConTRolled (ELECTRa) study: a European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) registry of transvenous lead extraction outcomes. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(40):2995-3005.
[6] Pokorney et al. Outcomes Associated with Extraction versus Capping and Abandoning Pacing and Defibrillator Leads Circulation 2017 Oct 10;136(15):1387-1395. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.027636. Epub2017 Aug 22.
[7] Carillo RG, Tsang DC, Azarrafiy R, Boyle TA. Multi-Year Evaluation of Compliant. Endovascular Balloon in Treating Superior Vena Cava Tears During Transvenous Lead Extraction. EHRA late-breaking trial. March 19, 2018.
[8] Wazni, O et. al. Lead Extraction in the Contemporary Setting: The LExICon Study: A Multicenter Observational Retrospective Study of Consecutive Laser Lead Extractions, J Am Coll Cardiol, 55:579-586
[9] Chua, J.D., et al. (2000). Diagnosis and management of infections involving implantable electrophysiologic cardiac devices. Annals of Internal Medicine, 133(8): 604- 608.18.
[10] del Rio A, AngueraI, Miro JM, et al. Surgical treatment of pacemaker and defibrillator lead endocarditis: the impact of electrode lead extraction on outcome. Chest 2003;124:1451–9.19.
[11] Mattei, E., Gentili, G., Censi, F., Triventi, M. and Calcagnini, G. (2015), Impact of capped and uncapped abandoned leads on the heating of an MR-conditional pacemaker implant. Magn Reson Med, 73: 390–400. doi: 10.1002/mrm.25106
[12] Oginosawa Y, Abe H, Nakashima Y. The incidence and risk factors for venous obstruction after implantation of transvenous pacing leads. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2002;25:1605–1611.
[13] Kutarski, A., Pietura, R., Młynarczyk, K., Małecka, B., & Głowniak, A. (2012). Pacemaker lead extraction and recapture of venous access: technical problems arising from extensive venous obstruction. Cardiology journal, 19(5), 513-517.
[14] Ryan Azarrafiy, BA; Darren C. Tsang, BS; Bruce L. Wilkoff, MD, FHRS; Roger G. Carrillo, MD, MBA, FHRS. The Endovascular Occlusion Balloon for Treatment of Superior Vena Cava Tears During Transvenous Lead Extraction: A Multi-Year Analysis and An Update to Best Practice Protocol. Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, August 2019.
[15] Chrostopher Aldo Rinaldi, Igor Diemberger, Mauro Biffi, Yu-Rong Gao, Enoch Sizto, Nancy Jin, Laurence M Epstein, Pascal Defaye, Safety and success of transvenous lead extraction using excimer laser sheaths: a meta-analysis of over 1700 patients, EP Europace, Volume 25, Issue 11, November 2023, euad298, doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad298

You are about to visit a Philips global content page

Continue

You are about to visit a Philips global content page

Continue

Our site can best be viewed with the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Firefox.