AIMS: Comparative studies on the longevity of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) among different manufacturers have never been reported. Longevity of ICD devices implanted from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2002 was prospectively investigated according to their type and manufacturer. METHODS AND RESULTS: Longevity of single-chamber (SC), double-chamber (DC), and biventricular (CRT-D) ICDs from Medtronic (MDT), Guidant (GDT), and St Jude Medical (SJM) was measured in all the patients who required device replacement. The observation follow-up ended on 31 December 2007; patients who died prematurely or were transplanted before battery exhaustion were excluded from the analysis. Factors associated with longevity (number of delivered shocks, pacing activity) were researched. One hundred and fifty-three patients received an ICD in the abovementioned period. Six underwent heart transplantation, and 23 died before device replacement; 80 had an SC device, 59 had DC device, and 14 had CRT-D device. Longevity of MDT was superior to GDT and SJM, replacement rates being, respectively, 42%, 95.3%, and 97.2%. Only MDT manufacturers and SC type were associated with greater ICD longevity. Longevity had an impact on the cost/month of treatment of replaced ICDs. CONCLUSION: Battery longevity is significantly different among manufacturers. ICD cost is strictly dependent on device longevity, whereas device up-front cost is of limited clinical meaning. Appropriate assessment of cost-effectiveness should be based on ICD longevity in the real-life scenario.
AIMS: Comparative studies on the longevity of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) among different manufacturers have never been reported. Longevity of ICD devices implanted from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2002 was prospectively investigated according to their type and manufacturer. METHODS AND RESULTS: Longevity of single-chamber (SC), double-chamber (DC), and biventricular (CRT-D) ICDs from Medtronic (MDT), Guidant (GDT), and St Jude Medical (SJM) was measured in all the patients who required device replacement. The observation follow-up ended on 31 December 2007; patients who died prematurely or were transplanted before battery exhaustion were excluded from the analysis. Factors associated with longevity (number of delivered shocks, pacing activity) were researched. One hundred and fifty-three patients received an ICD in the abovementioned period. Six underwent heart transplantation, and 23 died before device replacement; 80 had an SC device, 59 had DC device, and 14 had CRT-D device. Longevity of MDT was superior to GDT and SJM, replacement rates being, respectively, 42%, 95.3%, and 97.2%. Only MDT manufacturers and SC type were associated with greater ICD longevity. Longevity had an impact on the cost/month of treatment of replaced ICDs. CONCLUSION: Battery longevity is significantly different among manufacturers. ICD cost is strictly dependent on device longevity, whereas device up-front cost is of limited clinical meaning. Appropriate assessment of cost-effectiveness should be based on ICD longevity in the real-life scenario.
Authors: J Lüker; A Sultan; T Plenge; J van den Bruck; C-H Heeger; S Meyer; K Mischke; R R Tilz; D Vollmann; G Nölker; B Schäffer; S Willems; D Steven Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-11-18 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Maurizio Landolina; Antonio Curnis; Giovanni Morani; Antonello Vado; Ernesto Ammendola; Antonio D'onofrio; Giuseppe Stabile; Martino Crosato; Barbara Petracci; Carlo Ceriotti; Luca Bontempi; Martina Morosato; Gian Paolo Ballari; Maurizio Gasparini Journal: Europace Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Arn Migowski; Antonio Luiz Ribeiro; Marilia Sá Carvalho; Vitor Manuel Pereira Azevedo; Rogério Brant Martins Chaves; Lucas de Aquino Hashimoto; Carolina de Aquino Xavier; Regina Maria de Aquino Xavier Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2015-03-13 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: Joachim Seegers; Pascal Muñoz Expósito; Lars Lüthje; Thomas Fischer; Matthias Lueken; Hannes Wenk; Samuel T Sossalla; Gerd Hasenfuss; Markus Zabel Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Paolo Zanaboni; Maurizio Landolina; Maurizio Marzegalli; Maurizio Lunati; Giovanni B Perego; Giuseppe Guenzati; Antonio Curnis; Sergio Valsecchi; Francesca Borghetti; Gabriella Borghi; Cristina Masella Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2013-05-30 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Simon von Gunten; Beat A Schaer; Sing-Chien Yap; Tamas Szili-Torok; Michael Kühne; Christian Sticherling; Stefan Osswald; Dominic A M J Theuns Journal: Europace Date: 2015-11-25 Impact factor: 5.214