Literature DB >> 19324305

Utilization of a national network for rapid response to the Medtronic Fidelis lead advisory: the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society Device Advisory Committee.

Andrew D Krahn1, Christopher S Simpson, Ratika Parkash, Raymond Yee, Jean Champagne, Jeffrey S Healey, Doug Cameron, Bernard Thibault, Iqwal Mangat, Stanley Tung, Laurence Sterns, David H Birnie, Derek V Exner, Soori Sivakumaran, Ted Davies, Benoit Coutu, Eugene Crystal, Kevin Wolfe, Atul Verma, Elizabeth A Stephenson, Shubhayan Sanatani, Robert Gow, Sean Connors, Felix Ayala Paredes, Michael Turabian, Teresa Kus, Martin Gardner, Vidal Essebag.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/
OBJECTIVE: The Canadian Heart Rhythm Society (CHRS) Device Advisory Committee was commissioned in 2006 to develop a mechanism for responding to advisories regarding cardiac rhythm device and lead performance.
METHODS: In the event of an advisory, the Chair classifies the advisory as urgent, semi-urgent, or routine based on the nature of the threat to the patient and the number of patients affected. The Chair uses an e-mail network with the committee members to disseminate advisory information and to assemble a consensus recommendation. Committee membership is broadly representative of the Canadian device community, including both academic and nonacademic centers, adult and pediatric specialists, and includes balanced regional representation. Recommendations are approved by the CHRS executive and made available to all implant and follow-up centers on the CHRS website.
RESULTS: With the Medtronic Fidelis lead advisory of October 15, 2007, the Chair classified the advisory as semi-urgent and initiated an e-mail discussion and preliminary survey of all Canadian implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) centers within 3 hours of advisory announcement. A CHRS membership statement was issued within 48 hours. Within 5 working days, sample letters to physicians and patients were posted for local adaptation and distribution. Complete data collection was obtained from all Canadian defibrillator centers. Analyses at 20, 25, 30, and 32 months suggest an accelerating course of failures (3.91% at 32 months, P <.0001), with a reduced likelihood of presentation with inappropriate shocks (from 56% to 21%, P = .0003).
CONCLUSION: A collaborative approach using an e-mail network provides a mechanism for a rapid national response to device advisories. The network allows collection of focused data on implanted device system performance and facilitates timely reporting of clinically relevant data to patients and clinicians.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19324305     DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2009.01.012

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


  2 in total

1.  The Sprint Fidelis lead fracture story: time to come to our senses?

Authors:  P F H M van Dessel
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 2.  Considerations for cardiac device lead extraction.

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

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.