Literature DB >> 18534361

Failure of impedance monitoring to prevent adverse clinical events caused by fracture of a recalled high-voltage implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead.

Linda M Kallinen1, Robert G Hauser, Ken W Lee, Adrian K Almquist, William T Katsiyiannis, Chuen Y Tang, Daniel P Melby, Charles C Gornick.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Medtronic Sprint Fidelis implantable cardioverter-defibrillator high-voltage lead is prone to fracture. The October 2007 safety advisory recommended lead impedance monitoring to aid in identifying lead fractures.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this single-center study was to examine the effectiveness of impedance monitoring for detecting Sprint Fidelis lead failures before they caused adverse clinical events such as inappropriate shocks.
METHODS: Impedance and sensing information were acquired during routine clinic and CareLink follow-up and at the time of lead failure using the Patient Alert, sensing integrity counter, nonsustained episode, and electrogram features in Medtronic pulse generators.
RESULTS: Between September 2004 and February 2008, 17 of 514 Sprint Fidelis leads (3.3%) followed up at our center failed between 11 and 35 months after implantation (mean 23.0 +/- 8.0 months). Fifteen of these failures (88%) were caused by pace-sense conductor fractures, and 2 (12%) were caused by high-voltage conductor defects. Twelve of 15 patients (80%) with pace-sense conductor fractures received inappropriate shocks; of these, 4 had no significant increase in lead impedance before they were shocked, 2 were shocked <3 hours after their lead impedances exceeded the 1,000 Omega audible alert threshold, and 2 patients did not hear the alarm. All pace-sense conductor failures whose sensing function could be evaluated (13 of 15) had oversensing based on stored data, and oversensing usually (11 of 13) preceded impedances changes.
CONCLUSION: Impedance monitoring did not prevent inappropriate shocks in two-thirds of our patients. Thus, pace-sense conductor impedance monitoring as currently implemented does not reliably forewarn patients of a lead malfunction. Consequently, patients who have Sprint Fidelis leads remain at risk for adverse clinical events associated with pace-sense conductor fracture.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18534361     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2008.02.039

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


  14 in total

1.  Medical devices: adapting to the comparative effectiveness landscape.

Authors:  Anita Mohandas; Kathleen A Foley
Journal:  Biotechnol Healthc       Date:  2010

Review 2.  Strategic choices to reduce implantable cardioverter-defibrillator-related morbidity.

Authors:  Oussama Wazni; Bruce L Wilkoff
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 32.419

3.  Characteristics of Sprint Fidelis lead failure.

Authors:  R J Beukema; A R Ramdat Misier; P P H M Delnoy; J J J Smit; A Elvan
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 4.  Considerations for cardiac device lead extraction.

Authors:  Oussama Wazni; Bruce L Wilkoff
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  Can we predict and prevent adverse events related to high-voltage implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead failure?

Authors:  Renato Pietro Ricci; Carlo Pignalberi; Barbara Magris; Stefano Aquilani; Vito Altamura; Loredana Morichelli; Antonio Porfili; Laura Quarta; Fabio Saputo; Massimo Santini
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2011-09-01       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 6.  Internet-based device-assisted remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors:  G Pron; L Ieraci; K Kaulback
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2012-01-01

7.  Physician decision making in anticoagulating atrial fibrillation: a prospective survey of a physician notification system for atrial fibrillation detected on cardiac implantable electronic devices of patients at increased risk of stroke.

Authors:  Justin M Cloutier; Clarence Khoo; Brett Hiebert; Anthony Wassef; Colette M Seifer
Journal:  Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2018-04

8.  Use of remote monitoring in the management of system-related complications in implantable defibrillator patients.

Authors:  D A M J Theuns; L Jordaens
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.380

9.  Contributions of remote monitoring to the follow-up of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads under advisory.

Authors:  Laurence Guédon-Moreau; Philippe Chevalier; Christelle Marquié; Claude Kouakam; Didier Klug; Dominique Lacroix; Francois Brigadeau; Salem Kacet
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2010-06-30       Impact factor: 29.983

10.  Remote Monitoring for Follow-up of Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.

Authors:  Renato Pietro Ricci; Loredana Morichelli; Niraj Varma
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2014-08-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.