Literature DB >> 15963404

The growing mismatch between patient longevity and the service life of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Robert G Hauser1.   

Abstract

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are lifesaving devices. Over 100,000 patients received ICDs in 2004 at a cost of $2 billion for the pulse generators alone. Because of expanded indications and coverage by Medicare, the number of ICD implantations and replacements is expected to increase dramatically during the next decade. The average ICD patient at our institution now lives nearly 10 years after the procedure. However, the service life of pulse generators has decreased from 4.7 +/- 1 year for single-chamber units to 4.0 +/- 1 year for dual-chamber devices. This mismatch between patient longevity and the service life of ICDs poses a significant clinical and economic burden that must be addressed. One near-term solution is for manufacturers to provide devices with larger batteries so that most patients can have an ICD pulse generator that lasts a lifetime. For the long-term, more robust or renewable energy sources are needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15963404     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.02.077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  29 in total

Review 1.  [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

2.  [Single- and dual-chamber ICDs: Are there still significant differences compared to pacemakers with regard to implantation and follow-up?].

Authors:  M Stockburger
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2008-12

3.  Significant differences in the expected versus observed longevity of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).

Authors:  Tali Shafat; Yael Baumfeld; Victor Novack; Yuval Konstantino; Guy Amit
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2012-07-14       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 4.  Extraction of implantable cardiac electronic devices.

Authors:  John Rickard; Bruce L Wilkoff
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 2.931

5.  Effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead coil treatments in facilitating ease of extraction.

Authors:  Joseph W Hackler; Zhiyuan Sun; Bruce D Lindsay; Bruce L Wilkoff; Mark J Niebauer; Patrick J Tchou; Mina K Chung
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2010-04-24       Impact factor: 6.343

6.  Finite element modeling of subcutaneous implantable defibrillator electrodes in an adult torso.

Authors:  Matthew Jolley; Jeroen Stinstra; Jess Tate; Steve Pieper; Rob Macleod; Larry Chu; Paul Wang; John K Triedman
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 6.343

7.  The mismatch between patient life expectancy and the service life of implantable devices in current cardioverter-defibrillator therapy: a call for larger device batteries.

Authors:  Jörg Neuzner
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 5.460

8.  Long-term performance of the St Jude Riata 1580-1582 ICD lead family.

Authors:  S D A Valk; D A M J Theuns; L Jordaens
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.380

9.  Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in Brugada syndrome treatment.

Authors:  Kai Wang; Kazunobu Yamauchi; Ping Li; Hiroki Kato; Makoto Kobayashi; Ken Kato; Yoshiyuki Shimizu
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 4.460

10.  Clinical implementation of guidelines for cardioverter defibrillator implantation: lost in translation?

Authors:  C J W Borleffs; A A M Wilde; M J M Cramer; E Wever; A Mosterd
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.380

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.