When a revision surgery related with removal of failed interbody cage is required, going through the previous passage can lead to a higher risk of neurological deficits or incidental dural injuries. Recently, the lateral approach has become a popular method instead of the conventional anterior or posterior approaches. The lateral approach is also useful method to remove failed interbody cage previously placed and re-do interbody fusion with lower risks compared to revision surgery via previous passage. However, there is still some difficulty in retrieving the interbody cage from the intervertebral space because of no spacious passage, subsidence, and uncontrolled movable cage. In this study, we introduce our experience that we removed failed interbody cage more easily with only the simple additional steps of making a taphole and fixing the cage using a thread-tipped stick.
Device Removal ; Methods ; Reoperation

From Jul.1995 to Oct.2003, at HCM City Blood Transfusion and Hematology Hospital, Hickman catheter was inserted on 41 patients with AML,ALL,BMT,Thalassemia. Main complications were bacterial infections, which accounted for 14,9%. In addition, some events occured accidentally such as chocking up (7,3%), breaking (4,8)% of the cuff in removal of catheter
Catheterization ; Bacterial Infections ; Device Removal

Methods about removal of intramedullary nail in complicated cases were reported in some literatures but there are no reports about nail removal in the ulna. The authors would like to report such a case and the technique. We removed bone of the inlet site and created another bony window using an osteotome to expose the interlocking screw holes. Only a bony window the size of 2 inter-interlocking holes at the most proximal part of the nail can be used to remove the nail with minimal damage of the triceps brachii tendon and soft tissue.
Bays ; Device Removal ; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary ; Tendons ; Ulna

Methods about removal of intramedullary nail in complicated cases were reported in some literatures but there are no reports about nail removal in the ulna. The authors would like to report such a case and the technique. We removed bone of the inlet site and created another bony window using an osteotome to expose the interlocking screw holes. Only a bony window the size of 2 inter-interlocking holes at the most proximal part of the nail can be used to remove the nail with minimal damage of the triceps brachii tendon and soft tissue.
Bays ; Device Removal ; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary ; Tendons ; Ulna

Compare and analyze the standards related to centrifuge apparatus and make corresponding suggestions in allusion to the problems existed in the test method and physical performance during product standard drafting process.
Blood Component Removal ; instrumentation ; Centrifugation ; instrumentation ; standards ; Device Approval ; standards

Cardiac Catheterization ; adverse effects ; Device Removal ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices needing lead extraction is increasing for various reasons, including infections, vascular obstruction, and lead failure. We report our experience with transvenous extraction of pacemaker and defibrillator leads via the inferior approach of using a gooseneck snare as a first-line therapy and compare extraction using a gooseneck snare with extraction using simple manual traction. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study included 23 consecutive patients (43 leads) who underwent transvenous lead extraction using a gooseneck snare (group A) and 10 consecutive patients (17 leads) who underwent lead extraction using simple manual traction (group B). Patient characteristics, indications, and outcomes were analyzed and compared between the groups. RESULTS: The dwelling time of the leads was longer in group A (median, 121) than in group B (median, 56; p=0.000). No differences were noted in the overall procedural success rate (69.6% vs. 70%), clinical procedural success rate (82.6% vs. 90%), and lead clinical success rate (86% vs. 94.1%) between the groups. The procedural success rates according to lead type were 89.2% and 100% for pacing leads and 66.7% and 83.3% for defibrillator leads in groups A and B, respectively. Major complications were noted in 3 (mortality in 1) patients in group A and 2 patients in group B. CONCLUSION: Transvenous extraction of pacemaker leads via an inferior approach using a gooseneck snare was both safe and effective. However, stand-alone transvenous extraction of defibrillator leads using the inferior approach was suboptimal.
Defibrillators ; Defibrillators, Implantable ; Device Removal ; Humans ; Pacemaker, Artificial ; SNARE Proteins* ; Traction*

Complete hardware removal is recommended in the case of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infections. However, the complete extraction of chronically implanted leads is not always achieved. The outcomes and optimal management of CIED infections with retained material after lead extractions have not been elucidated. In this case report, we present five patients with CIED infections with remnant lead tips even after lead extractions. Two patients had localized pocket infections, and were managed with antibiotics for a period of more than two weeks. The other three patients had infective endocarditis, and were managed with antibiotics for a period of more than four weeks. In one patient, the lead tip migrated to the right pulmonary artery, but did not produce any symptoms or complications. Only one of five patients experienced a resurgence of an infection.
Anti-Bacterial Agents ; Device Removal ; Endocarditis ; Humans ; Pacemaker, Artificial ; Pulmonary Artery

Adult ; Device Removal ; methods ; Ductus Arteriosus, Patent ; Heart Septal Defects, Atrial ; therapy ; Humans ; Male

Adolescent ; Adult ; Catheterization, Central Venous ; instrumentation ; Device Removal ; Humans ; Male ; Vena Cava, Inferior ; Vena Cava, Superior