Literature DB >> 15851191

Deaths associated with implantable cardioverter defibrillator failure and deactivation reported in the United States Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database.

Robert G Hauser1, Linda Kallinen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to understand the causes of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) failure and complications so that adverse events, including unnecessary death, can be prevented.
BACKGROUND: Sudden death may occur if an ICD fails to treat life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias.
METHODS: The United States Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database was searched for ICD devices and the search term "death." The search yielded 212 death events involving 100 ICD pulse generator and lead models from five manufacturers. These death events were associated with (A) ICD devices for which pulse generator interrogation data and/or the results of the manufacturers analysis of returned devices were available; (B) ICD devices for which neither interrogation data nor the results of the manufacturer's analysis were reported; and (C) normally functioning ICDs that had been deactivated.
RESULTS: (A) A total of 103 (69%) of 150 death events were associated with defective pulse generators or high-voltage leads. Most (34/42 [81%]) apparently sudden or arrhythmic death events were associated with high-voltage lead failure; other deaths were related to pulse generator failure (8/42 [19%]) caused by electronic component defects. (B) A total of 21 of 51 death events were related to a manufacturer's recall; all deaths were arrhythmic but without allegation of device failure. (C) Eleven death events occurred in patients whose pulse generators were found to be off or deactivated; these devices appeared to have been deactivated accidentally or by exposure to magnetic fields, or they were not reactivated after elective surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: ICD device failure and unintended pulse generator deactivation have resulted in unnecessary deaths. Although these deaths may be infrequent, improved devices and follow-up techniques are needed. The magnet deactivation feature probably is unsafe, and health professionals and patients should be cautioned.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15851191     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2004.05.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart Rhythm        ISSN: 1547-5271            Impact factor:   6.343


  14 in total

1.  Implantable rhythm management device failures and patient/physician notification: a simmering cauldron boils over.

Authors:  Sanjeev Saksena
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 2.  [ICD lead defects: diagnosis and therapeutical options].

Authors:  Christian G Wollmann; Dirk Böcker; Andreas Löher; Hans H Scheld; Günter Breithardt; Rainer Gradaus
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2009-02-11

3.  2014 ACC/AHA guideline on perioperative cardiovascular evaluation and management of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. Developed in collaboration with the American College of Surgeons, American Society of Anesthesiologists, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, and Society of Vascular Medicine Endorsed by the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Authors:  Lee A Fleisher; Kirsten E Fleischmann; Andrew D Auerbach; Susan A Barnason; Joshua A Beckman; Biykem Bozkurt; Victor G Davila-Roman; Marie D Gerhard-Herman; Thomas A Holly; Garvan C Kane; Joseph E Marine; M Timothy Nelson; Crystal C Spencer; Annemarie Thompson; Henry H Ting; Barry F Uretsky; Duminda N Wijeysundera
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 4.  Management of cardiac implantable electronic devices during interventional pulmonology procedures.

Authors:  Abhishek Kumar; Samjot Singh Dhillon; Spandan Patel; Matthias Grube; Amit Noheria
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 5.  [Home Monitoring with implantable ICD--a diagnostic innovation?].

Authors:  W Jung; R Birkemeyer
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2005-09

6.  A randomized in vitro evaluation of transient and permanent cardiac implantable electronic device malfunctions following direct exposure up to 10 Gy.

Authors:  Maria Daniela Falco; Domenico Genovesi; Luciana Caravatta; Clelia Di Carlo; Ekaterina Bliakharskaia; Marianna Appignani; Massimiliano Faustino; Nanda Furia; Enrico Di Girolamo
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 3.621

7.  Assessment of the Safety Risk of Dermatoscope Magnets in Patients With Cardiovascular Implanted Electronic Devices.

Authors:  Ayelet Rishpon; Ralph Braun; Martin A Weinstock; Stephen Kulju; Andrea Grenga; Cristian Navarrete-Dechent; Nadeem G Marghoob; Jan Steffel; Ashfaq A Marghoob
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 10.282

Review 8.  Remote monitoring of patients with implanted cardiac devices.

Authors:  Fred Kusumoto; Nora Goldschlager
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.882

9.  Deaths and cardiovascular injuries due to device-assisted implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and pacemaker lead extraction.

Authors:  Robert G Hauser; William T Katsiyiannis; Charles C Gornick; Adrian K Almquist; Linda M Kallinen
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2009-11-27       Impact factor: 5.214

10.  Same-day discovery of implantable cardioverter defibrillator dysfunction in the TRUST remote monitoring trial: influence of contrasting messaging systems.

Authors:  Niraj Varma; Behzad B Pavri; Bruce Stambler; Justin Michalski
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2012-12-19       Impact factor: 5.214

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.