Vaibhav R Vaidya1, Roshini Asirvatham1, Gurukripa N Kowlgi1, Ming-Yan Dai2, Jordan J Cochuyt3, David O Hodge3, Abhishek J Deshmukh1, Yong Mei Cha4. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA; Cardiovascular Research Institute and Department of Cardiology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Hubei Key Laboratory of Cardiology, Wuhan, China. 3. Department of Quantitative Heath Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA. 4. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. Electronic address: ycha@mayo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe trends in cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) insertion over the past 3 decades in Olmsted County. BACKGROUND: Trends in CIED insertion in the United States have not been extensively studied. METHODS: The Rochester Epidemiology Project is a medical records linkage system comprising the records of all residents of Olmsted County from 1966 to the present. CIED insertion between 1988 and 2018 was determined using International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision, International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision, and Current Procedural Terminology codes. Age- and sex-adjusted incidence rates, adjusted to the 2010 US White population, were calculated. Trends in incidence over time, across age groups, and between sex are estimated using Poisson regression models. RESULTS: The age- and sex-adjusted incidence of device implants for the study period were as follows: overall CIED: 82.4 (95% CI: 79.2-85.6); permanent pacemaker (PPM): 62.9 (95% CI: 60.0-65.7); implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD): 14.0 (95% CI: 12.6-15.3); and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT): 5.6 (95% CI: 4.7-6.4) per 100,000 per year. The overall incidence of CIED insertion increased between 1988 to 1993 and 2000 to 2005 and then decreased between 2000 to 2005 and 2012 to 218 (P < 0.0001). PPM and ICD insertion incidence followed these trends, whereas the incidence of CRT insertion increased between 2000 to 2005 and 2012 to 2018. CIED insertion incidence increased with age (P < 0.0001). CIED insertion incidence was greater in men (116.3 vs 57.3 per 100,000 per year in men vs women; P < 0.0001). The overall survival of CRT recipients improved (P = 0.0044). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence values for PPM and ICD implants are decreasing, while the incidence of CRT implants is increasing. CIEDs are increasingly inserted in the elderly, men, and patients with higher comorbidities.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe trends in cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) insertion over the past 3 decades in Olmsted County. BACKGROUND: Trends in CIED insertion in the United States have not been extensively studied. METHODS: The Rochester Epidemiology Project is a medical records linkage system comprising the records of all residents of Olmsted County from 1966 to the present. CIED insertion between 1988 and 2018 was determined using International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision, International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision, and Current Procedural Terminology codes. Age- and sex-adjusted incidence rates, adjusted to the 2010 US White population, were calculated. Trends in incidence over time, across age groups, and between sex are estimated using Poisson regression models. RESULTS: The age- and sex-adjusted incidence of device implants for the study period were as follows: overall CIED: 82.4 (95% CI: 79.2-85.6); permanent pacemaker (PPM): 62.9 (95% CI: 60.0-65.7); implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD): 14.0 (95% CI: 12.6-15.3); and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT): 5.6 (95% CI: 4.7-6.4) per 100,000 per year. The overall incidence of CIED insertion increased between 1988 to 1993 and 2000 to 2005 and then decreased between 2000 to 2005 and 2012 to 218 (P < 0.0001). PPM and ICD insertion incidence followed these trends, whereas the incidence of CRT insertion increased between 2000 to 2005 and 2012 to 2018. CIED insertion incidence increased with age (P < 0.0001). CIED insertion incidence was greater in men (116.3 vs 57.3 per 100,000 per year in men vs women; P < 0.0001). The overall survival of CRT recipients improved (P = 0.0044). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence values for PPM and ICD implants are decreasing, while the incidence of CRT implants is increasing. CIEDs are increasingly inserted in the elderly, men, and patients with higher comorbidities.
Authors: Grace Lin; Ryan A Meverden; David O Hodge; Daniel Z Uslan; David L Hayes; Peter A Brady Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2008-03-07 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Daniel Z Uslan; Imad M Tleyjeh; Larry M Baddour; Paul A Friedman; Sarah M Jenkins; Jennifer L St Sauver; David L Hayes Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2008-02-19 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Arnold J Greenspon; Jasmine D Patel; Edmund Lau; Jorge A Ochoa; Daniel R Frisch; Reginald T Ho; Behzad B Pavri; Steven M Kurtz Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Adrian F Hernandez; Gregg C Fonarow; Li Liang; Sana M Al-Khatib; Lesley H Curtis; Kenneth A LaBresh; Clyde W Yancy; Nancy M Albert; Eric D Peterson Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-10-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Margaret M Redfield; Steven J Jacobsen; John C Burnett; Douglas W Mahoney; Kent R Bailey; Richard J Rodeheffer Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-01-08 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Walter A Rocca; Barbara P Yawn; Jennifer L St Sauver; Brandon R Grossardt; L Joseph Melton Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2012-11-28 Impact factor: 7.616