Cargando…
Rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads are considered as the ‘weakest link’ in defibrillator systems due to FDA recalls and advisories involving popular lead models from major manufacturers. The rate of electrical failure of ICD leads not implicated in a recall is however not...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6531633/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30576743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipej.2018.12.001 |
_version_ | 1783420865733459968 |
---|---|
author | Khattak, Furqan Gupta, Aman Alluri, Krishna Shariff, Nasir Saba, Samir |
author_facet | Khattak, Furqan Gupta, Aman Alluri, Krishna Shariff, Nasir Saba, Samir |
author_sort | Khattak, Furqan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads are considered as the ‘weakest link’ in defibrillator systems due to FDA recalls and advisories involving popular lead models from major manufacturers. The rate of electrical failure of ICD leads not implicated in a recall is however not well determined. METHODS: Medical records of patients implanted with ICDs at hospitals of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between 2002 and 2014 were analyzed. Leads were classified as having electrically failed if removed or replaced for reasons other than infection or heart transplantation. Patients were followed to endpoint of death or electrical lead failure. RESULTS: 2410 consecutive ICD recipients (mean age 66 ± 13 years, women 22%, single/dual/biventricular-ICD 20%/44%/36%) were included. During a mean follow-up of 3.9 ± 3.3 years, 1272 patients (53%) died, 55 patients (2.3%) had ICD lead electrical failure, and 1052 (44%) patients were alive with functional leads at the time of last follow-up. Patients with failed leads had higher BMI (p = 0.07), better functional status (p = 0.04), higher serum creatinine (p = 0.004), wider QRS complex (p = 0.01), higher number of implanted leads (p = 0.06) and were more likely to have ischemic cardiomyopathy (p = 0.03). After adjusting for these variables in a binary logistic regression model, only a lower BMI, presence of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, and a better functional status remained independently predictive of electrical failure. CONCLUSIONS: Only 2.3% of non-recalled ICD leads experience electrical failure (annual failure rate of 0.6%). A higher patient functional status, lower BMI, and non-ischemic etiology of cardiomyopathy are independently associated with higher rates of ICD lead failure. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6531633 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65316332019-05-28 Rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads Khattak, Furqan Gupta, Aman Alluri, Krishna Shariff, Nasir Saba, Samir Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J Original Article BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads are considered as the ‘weakest link’ in defibrillator systems due to FDA recalls and advisories involving popular lead models from major manufacturers. The rate of electrical failure of ICD leads not implicated in a recall is however not well determined. METHODS: Medical records of patients implanted with ICDs at hospitals of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between 2002 and 2014 were analyzed. Leads were classified as having electrically failed if removed or replaced for reasons other than infection or heart transplantation. Patients were followed to endpoint of death or electrical lead failure. RESULTS: 2410 consecutive ICD recipients (mean age 66 ± 13 years, women 22%, single/dual/biventricular-ICD 20%/44%/36%) were included. During a mean follow-up of 3.9 ± 3.3 years, 1272 patients (53%) died, 55 patients (2.3%) had ICD lead electrical failure, and 1052 (44%) patients were alive with functional leads at the time of last follow-up. Patients with failed leads had higher BMI (p = 0.07), better functional status (p = 0.04), higher serum creatinine (p = 0.004), wider QRS complex (p = 0.01), higher number of implanted leads (p = 0.06) and were more likely to have ischemic cardiomyopathy (p = 0.03). After adjusting for these variables in a binary logistic regression model, only a lower BMI, presence of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, and a better functional status remained independently predictive of electrical failure. CONCLUSIONS: Only 2.3% of non-recalled ICD leads experience electrical failure (annual failure rate of 0.6%). A higher patient functional status, lower BMI, and non-ischemic etiology of cardiomyopathy are independently associated with higher rates of ICD lead failure. Elsevier 2018-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6531633/ /pubmed/30576743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipej.2018.12.001 Text en © 2018 Indian Heart Rhythm Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Khattak, Furqan Gupta, Aman Alluri, Krishna Shariff, Nasir Saba, Samir Rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads |
title | Rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads |
title_full | Rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads |
title_fullStr | Rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads |
title_full_unstemmed | Rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads |
title_short | Rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads |
title_sort | rate and predictors of electrical failure in non-recalled defibrillator leads |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6531633/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30576743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipej.2018.12.001 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT khattakfurqan rateandpredictorsofelectricalfailureinnonrecalleddefibrillatorleads AT guptaaman rateandpredictorsofelectricalfailureinnonrecalleddefibrillatorleads AT allurikrishna rateandpredictorsofelectricalfailureinnonrecalleddefibrillatorleads AT shariffnasir rateandpredictorsofelectricalfailureinnonrecalleddefibrillatorleads AT sabasamir rateandpredictorsofelectricalfailureinnonrecalleddefibrillatorleads |