Cargando…

Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to describe key elements, clinical outcomes, and potential uses of the Kaiser Permanente–Cardiac Device Registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a cohort study of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD), pacemakers (PM), and cardiac resynchronization ther...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gupta, Nigel, Kiley, Mary Lou, Anthony, Faith, Young, Charlie, Brar, Somjot, Kwaku, Kevin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4943256/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26961369
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.002798
_version_ 1782442560727285760
author Gupta, Nigel
Kiley, Mary Lou
Anthony, Faith
Young, Charlie
Brar, Somjot
Kwaku, Kevin
author_facet Gupta, Nigel
Kiley, Mary Lou
Anthony, Faith
Young, Charlie
Brar, Somjot
Kwaku, Kevin
author_sort Gupta, Nigel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to describe key elements, clinical outcomes, and potential uses of the Kaiser Permanente–Cardiac Device Registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a cohort study of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD), pacemakers (PM), and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices implanted between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2013 by ≈400 physicians in 6 US geographical regions. Registry data variables, including patient characteristics, comorbidities, indication for procedures, complications, and revisions, were captured using the healthcare system's electronic medical record. Outcomes were identified using electronic screening algorithms and adjudicated via chart review. There were 11 924 ICDs, 33 519 PMs, 4472 CRTs, and 66 067 leads registered. A higher proportion of devices were implanted in males: 75.1% (ICD), 55.0% (PM), and 66.7% (CRT), with mean patient age 63.2 years (ICD), 75.2 (PM), and 67.2 (CRT). The 30‐day postoperative incidence of tamponade, hematoma, and pneumothorax were ≤0.3% (ICD), ≤0.6% (PM), and ≤0.4% (CRT). Device failures requiring revision occurred at a rate of 2.17% for ICDs, 0.85% for PMs, and 4.93% for CRTs, per 100 patient observation years. Superficial infection rates were <0.03% for all devices; deep infection rates were 0.6% (ICD), 0.5% (PM), and 1.0% (CRT). Results were used to monitor vendor‐specific variations and were systematically shared with individual regions to address potential variations in outcomes, utilization, and to assist with the management of device recalls. CONCLUSIONS: The Kaiser Permanente–Cardiac Device Registry is a robust tool to monitor postprocedural patient outcomes and postmarket surveillance of implants and potentially change practice patterns.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4943256
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49432562016-07-20 Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes Gupta, Nigel Kiley, Mary Lou Anthony, Faith Young, Charlie Brar, Somjot Kwaku, Kevin J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to describe key elements, clinical outcomes, and potential uses of the Kaiser Permanente–Cardiac Device Registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a cohort study of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD), pacemakers (PM), and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices implanted between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2013 by ≈400 physicians in 6 US geographical regions. Registry data variables, including patient characteristics, comorbidities, indication for procedures, complications, and revisions, were captured using the healthcare system's electronic medical record. Outcomes were identified using electronic screening algorithms and adjudicated via chart review. There were 11 924 ICDs, 33 519 PMs, 4472 CRTs, and 66 067 leads registered. A higher proportion of devices were implanted in males: 75.1% (ICD), 55.0% (PM), and 66.7% (CRT), with mean patient age 63.2 years (ICD), 75.2 (PM), and 67.2 (CRT). The 30‐day postoperative incidence of tamponade, hematoma, and pneumothorax were ≤0.3% (ICD), ≤0.6% (PM), and ≤0.4% (CRT). Device failures requiring revision occurred at a rate of 2.17% for ICDs, 0.85% for PMs, and 4.93% for CRTs, per 100 patient observation years. Superficial infection rates were <0.03% for all devices; deep infection rates were 0.6% (ICD), 0.5% (PM), and 1.0% (CRT). Results were used to monitor vendor‐specific variations and were systematically shared with individual regions to address potential variations in outcomes, utilization, and to assist with the management of device recalls. CONCLUSIONS: The Kaiser Permanente–Cardiac Device Registry is a robust tool to monitor postprocedural patient outcomes and postmarket surveillance of implants and potentially change practice patterns. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4943256/ /pubmed/26961369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.002798 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Research
Gupta, Nigel
Kiley, Mary Lou
Anthony, Faith
Young, Charlie
Brar, Somjot
Kwaku, Kevin
Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes
title Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes
title_full Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes
title_fullStr Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes
title_short Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes
title_sort multi‐center, community‐based cardiac implantable electronic devices registry: population, device utilization, and outcomes
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4943256/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26961369
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.002798
work_keys_str_mv AT guptanigel multicentercommunitybasedcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesregistrypopulationdeviceutilizationandoutcomes
AT kileymarylou multicentercommunitybasedcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesregistrypopulationdeviceutilizationandoutcomes
AT anthonyfaith multicentercommunitybasedcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesregistrypopulationdeviceutilizationandoutcomes
AT youngcharlie multicentercommunitybasedcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesregistrypopulationdeviceutilizationandoutcomes
AT brarsomjot multicentercommunitybasedcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesregistrypopulationdeviceutilizationandoutcomes
AT kwakukevin multicentercommunitybasedcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesregistrypopulationdeviceutilizationandoutcomes