Joachim Seegers1,2, Pascal Muñoz Expósito1, Lars Lüthje1, Thomas Fischer1, Matthias Lueken1, Hannes Wenk1, Samuel T Sossalla1, Gerd Hasenfuss1, Markus Zabel3. 1. Department of Cardiology and Pneumology and Clinical Electrophysiology Division, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Göttingen, Germany. 2. Department of Internal Medicine II, Division of Cardiology, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. 3. Department of Cardiology and Pneumology and Clinical Electrophysiology Division, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Göttingen, Germany. markus.zabel@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND OR PURPOSE: Real-life comparative data of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) longevity are needed to identify the best possible device longevity for optimal patient comfort and to minimize risk for multiple replacements. METHODS: We retrospectively studied ICD longevity in a large single-center population. At our institution, 1272 consecutive patients were implanted with 1665 ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) devices between 1998 and 2010. Device data and follow-up were retrieved from the continuous ICD clinic documentation, and generator replacements were verified from the hospital charts. Kaplan-Meier event probabilities for the time to generator replacement were calculated according to device type, pacing percentage (sum of atrial, right and left ventricular pacing, if applicable) and right ventricular pacing threshold, incidence of ICD shocks, and manufacturer. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression was performed in addition. RESULTS: A total of 470 devices were replaced for elective replacement indicator. These occurred after 5.4 years (95% confidence interval, 5.1 to 5.6 years) in 175 of 625 implanted Boston Scientific or Guidant devices, after 5.7 years (5.5 to 5.9 years) in 266 of 883 Medtronic devices, and 5.2 years (5.0 to 5.4 years) in 29 of 157 Biotronik devices, respectively. Differences between manufacturers remained significant upon multivariate analysis (Medtronic vs. Boston Scientific: P = 0.01; both vs. Biotronik: P < 0.01) as did differences of device type (single- and dual-chamber ICD vs. CRT-D, P < 0.01) and pacing percentage (P < 0.01). Pacing output and ICD shocks did not influence battery longevity. CONCLUSION: ICD longevity differed significantly between manufacturers, independent of device type or pacing parameters.
BACKGROUND OR PURPOSE: Real-life comparative data of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) longevity are needed to identify the best possible device longevity for optimal patient comfort and to minimize risk for multiple replacements. METHODS: We retrospectively studied ICD longevity in a large single-center population. At our institution, 1272 consecutive patients were implanted with 1665 ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) devices between 1998 and 2010. Device data and follow-up were retrieved from the continuous ICD clinic documentation, and generator replacements were verified from the hospital charts. Kaplan-Meier event probabilities for the time to generator replacement were calculated according to device type, pacing percentage (sum of atrial, right and left ventricular pacing, if applicable) and right ventricular pacing threshold, incidence of ICD shocks, and manufacturer. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression was performed in addition. RESULTS: A total of 470 devices were replaced for elective replacement indicator. These occurred after 5.4 years (95% confidence interval, 5.1 to 5.6 years) in 175 of 625 implanted Boston Scientific or Guidant devices, after 5.7 years (5.5 to 5.9 years) in 266 of 883 Medtronic devices, and 5.2 years (5.0 to 5.4 years) in 29 of 157 Biotronik devices, respectively. Differences between manufacturers remained significant upon multivariate analysis (Medtronic vs. Boston Scientific: P = 0.01; both vs. Biotronik: P < 0.01) as did differences of device type (single- and dual-chamber ICD vs. CRT-D, P < 0.01) and pacing percentage (P < 0.01). Pacing output and ICD shocks did not influence battery longevity. CONCLUSION: ICD longevity differed significantly between manufacturers, independent of device type or pacing parameters.
Authors: C Jan Willem Borleffs; Joep Thijssen; Mihály K de Bie; Johannes B van Rees; Guido H van Welsenes; Lieselot van Erven; Jeroen J Bax; Suzanne C Cannegieter; Martin J Schalij Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2010-04-27 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Joep Thijssen; C Jan Willem Borleffs; Johannes B van Rees; SumChe Man; Mihály K de Bie; Jeroen Venlet; Enno T van der Velde; Lieselot van Erven; Martin J Schalij Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Guido H Van Welsenes; Johannes B Van Rees; Joep Thijssen; Serge A Trines; Lieselot Van Erven; Martin J Schalij; C J W Borleffs Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2011-07-21
Authors: G Gregoratos; M D Cheitlin; A Conill; A E Epstein; C Fellows; T B Ferguson; R A Freedman; M A Hlatky; G V Naccarelli; S Saksena; R C Schlant; M J Silka Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-04-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Arthur J Moss; Wojciech Zareba; W Jackson Hall; Helmut Klein; David J Wilber; David S Cannom; James P Daubert; Steven L Higgins; Mary W Brown; Mark L Andrews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Gust H Bardy; Kerry L Lee; Daniel B Mark; Jeanne E Poole; Douglas L Packer; Robin Boineau; Michael Domanski; Charles Troutman; Jill Anderson; George Johnson; Steven E McNulty; Nancy Clapp-Channing; Linda D Davidson-Ray; Elizabeth S Fraulo; Daniel P Fishbein; Richard M Luceri; John H Ip Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-01-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: A J Moss; W J Hall; D S Cannom; J P Daubert; S L Higgins; H Klein; J H Levine; S Saksena; A L Waldo; D Wilber; M W Brown; M Heo Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-12-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Giuseppe Boriani; Frieder Braunschweig; Jean Claude Deharo; Francisco Leyva; Andrzej Lubinski; Carlo Lazzaro Journal: Europace Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 5.214