BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in children and congenital heart disease patients is hampered by poor long-term lead survival. Lead extraction is technically difficult and carries substantial morbidity. We sought to determine the outcomes of ICD leads in pediatric and congenital heart disease patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Pediatric Lead Extractability and Survival Evaluation (PLEASE) is a 24-center international registry. Pediatric and congenital heart disease patients with ICD lead implantations from 2005 to 2010 were eligible. Study subjects comprised 878 ICD patients (44% congenital heart disease). Mean±SD age at implantation was 18.6±9.8 years. Of the 965 total leads, 54% were thin (≤7F), of which 57% were Fidelis, and 23% were coated with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene. There were 139 ICD lead failures (14%) in 132 patients (15%) at a mean lead age of 2.0±1.4 years, causing shocks in 53 patients (40%). Independent predictors of lead failure included younger implantation age and Fidelis leads. Actuarial analysis showed an incremental risk of lead failure with younger age at implantation: <8 years compared with >18 years (P=0.015). The actuarial yearly failure rate was 2.3% for non-Fidelis and 9.1% for Fidelis leads. Extraction was performed on 143 leads (80% thin, 7% expanded polytetrafluoroethylene coated), with lead age as the only independent predictor for advanced extraction techniques. There were 6 major extraction complications (4%) but no procedural mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that ICD leads in children and congenital heart disease patients have an age-related suboptimal performance, further compounded by a high failure rate of Fidelis leads. Advanced extraction techniques were common and correlated with older lead age. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00335036.
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in children and congenital heart diseasepatients is hampered by poor long-term lead survival. Lead extraction is technically difficult and carries substantial morbidity. We sought to determine the outcomes of ICD leads in pediatric and congenital heart diseasepatients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Pediatric Lead Extractability and Survival Evaluation (PLEASE) is a 24-center international registry. Pediatric and congenital heart diseasepatients with ICD lead implantations from 2005 to 2010 were eligible. Study subjects comprised 878 ICDpatients (44% congenital heart disease). Mean±SD age at implantation was 18.6±9.8 years. Of the 965 total leads, 54% were thin (≤7F), of which 57% were Fidelis, and 23% were coated with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene. There were 139 ICD lead failures (14%) in 132 patients (15%) at a mean lead age of 2.0±1.4 years, causing shocks in 53 patients (40%). Independent predictors of lead failure included younger implantation age and Fidelis leads. Actuarial analysis showed an incremental risk of lead failure with younger age at implantation: <8 years compared with >18 years (P=0.015). The actuarial yearly failure rate was 2.3% for non-Fidelis and 9.1% for Fidelis leads. Extraction was performed on 143 leads (80% thin, 7% expanded polytetrafluoroethylene coated), with lead age as the only independent predictor for advanced extraction techniques. There were 6 major extraction complications (4%) but no procedural mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that ICD leads in children and congenital heart diseasepatients have an age-related suboptimal performance, further compounded by a high failure rate of Fidelis leads. Advanced extraction techniques were common and correlated with older lead age. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00335036.
Authors: Gabrielle Norrish; Henry Chubb; Ella Field; Karen McLeod; Maria Ilina; Georgia Spentzou; Jan Till; Piers E F Daubeney; Alan Graham Stuart; Jane Matthews; Dominic Hares; Elspeth Brown; Katie Linter; Vinay Bhole; Krishnakumar Pillai; Michael Bowes; Caroline B Jones; Orhan Uzun; Amos Wong; Arthur Yue; Shankar Sadagopan; Tara Bharucha; Norah Yap; Eric Rosenthal; Sujeev Mathur; Satish Adwani; Zdenka Reinhardt; Jasveer Mangat; Juan Pablo Kaski Journal: Europace Date: 2021-03-08 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Milena Leo; Alexander J Sharp; Andre Briosa E Gala; Michael T B Pope; Timothy R Betts Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 1.759
Authors: Andrzej Kutarski; Wojciech Jacheć; Łukasz Tułecki; Marek Czajkowski; Dorota Nowosielecka; Paweł Stefańczyk; Konrad Tomków; Anna Polewczyk Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-06-10 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Jeffrey A Robinson; Martin J LaPage; Joseph Atallah; Gregory Webster; Christina Y Miyake; Christopher Ratnasamy; Nicholas J Ollberding; Shaun Mohan; Nicholas H Von Bergen; Christopher L Johnsrude; Jason M Garnreiter; David S Spar; Richard J Czosek Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2021-01-05