Active Surveillance of the Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Registry for Defibrillator Lead Failures.
Aged
Defibrillators, Implantable
Electric Countershock
/ adverse effects
Feasibility Studies
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Patient Safety
Product Surveillance, Postmarketing
Prospective Studies
Prosthesis Design
Prosthesis Failure
Registries
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
United States
defibrillator
registries
sample size
survival analysis
Journal
Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes
ISSN: 1941-7705
Titre abrégé: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101489148
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2020
04 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
15
4
2020
medline:
25
11
2020
entrez:
15
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Several defibrillator leads have been recalled due to early lead failure leading to significant patient harm. Confirming the safety of contemporary defibrillator leads is essential to optimizing treatment for patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). We therefore sought to assess the comparative long-term safety of the 4 most commonly implanted ICD leads within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. A propensity-matched survival analysis of the ICD Registry was performed evaluating 4 contemporary ICD leads in patients receiving an ICD system for the first time. All patients in the ICD Registry aged ≥18 years who underwent an implant of an ICD between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2016 were included. Monitoring of safety began with ICD implant and continued up to 5 years. A meaningful difference in ICD failure rate was defined as twice (or more) the lead failure rate observed in the propensity-matched comparator patients. Among the 374 132 patients who received a new ICD implant, no safety alerts were triggered for the primary safety end point of lead failure for any of the high energy leads studied. Estimated rates of freedom from lead failure at 5 years ranged from 97.7% to 98.9% for the 4 high-energy leads of interest. Though limited by incomplete long-term outcomes ascertainment, active surveillance of the ICD Registry suggests that there were no meaningful differences in the rate of ICD high-energy lead survival for the 4 most commonly used high-energy ICD leads.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Several defibrillator leads have been recalled due to early lead failure leading to significant patient harm. Confirming the safety of contemporary defibrillator leads is essential to optimizing treatment for patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). We therefore sought to assess the comparative long-term safety of the 4 most commonly implanted ICD leads within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A propensity-matched survival analysis of the ICD Registry was performed evaluating 4 contemporary ICD leads in patients receiving an ICD system for the first time. All patients in the ICD Registry aged ≥18 years who underwent an implant of an ICD between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2016 were included. Monitoring of safety began with ICD implant and continued up to 5 years. A meaningful difference in ICD failure rate was defined as twice (or more) the lead failure rate observed in the propensity-matched comparator patients. Among the 374 132 patients who received a new ICD implant, no safety alerts were triggered for the primary safety end point of lead failure for any of the high energy leads studied. Estimated rates of freedom from lead failure at 5 years ranged from 97.7% to 98.9% for the 4 high-energy leads of interest.
CONCLUSIONS
Though limited by incomplete long-term outcomes ascertainment, active surveillance of the ICD Registry suggests that there were no meaningful differences in the rate of ICD high-energy lead survival for the 4 most commonly used high-energy ICD leads.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32283971
doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.119.006105
pmc: PMC7360169
mid: NIHMS1578103
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e006105Subventions
Organisme : NHLBI NIH HHS
ID : U54 HL108460
Pays : United States
Organisme : AHRQ HHS
ID : R01 HS019913
Pays : United States
Organisme : FDA HHS
ID : U01 FD004963
Pays : United States
Organisme : NLM NIH HHS
ID : R01 LM008142
Pays : United States
Organisme : FDA HHS
ID : U01 FD004493
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : R01 DK113201
Pays : United States
Organisme : EPA
ID : EP-D-13-052
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 Mar-Apr;13(2):180-7
pubmed: 16357356
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2011 Dec 14;11:75
pubmed: 22168892
Circulation. 2011 Feb 1;123(4):358-63
pubmed: 21242478
BMJ. 2012 Oct 11;345:e6848
pubmed: 23060660
HeartRhythm Case Rep. 2015 Sep 04;2(1):6-10
pubmed: 28491620
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015 Jan;8(1):38-46
pubmed: 25491915
JAMA. 2010 Nov 10;304(18):2019-27
pubmed: 21063011
Stat Med. 2010 Jul 20;29(16):1735-45
pubmed: 20572124
Med Decis Making. 2009 Mar-Apr;29(2):247-56
pubmed: 19015285
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007 Oct 11;:518-22
pubmed: 18693890
JAMA. 2016 Sep 20;316(11):1153-4
pubmed: 27398696
N Engl J Med. 2017 Feb 9;376(6):526-535
pubmed: 28121489
N Engl J Med. 2012 Mar 8;366(10):875-7
pubmed: 22332950
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1994 Mar;16(2):96-101; discussion 102
pubmed: 8039699
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012 Mar 1;5(2):189-96
pubmed: 22396584
Pharm Stat. 2011 Mar-Apr;10(2):150-61
pubmed: 20925139
N Engl J Med. 2007 Aug 9;357(6):602-3
pubmed: 17634450
Circulation. 2004 Jun 29;109(25):3073-7
pubmed: 15226222
Am Heart J. 2004 Jun;147(6):977-84
pubmed: 15199343
Contemp Clin Trials. 2011 May;32(3):307-8
pubmed: 21371573
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2009 Aug;2(4):411-6
pubmed: 19808497
J Arthroplasty. 2011 Sep;26(6 Suppl):14-8
pubmed: 21550764
N Engl J Med. 2007 Mar 8;356(10):981-4
pubmed: 17296826
N Engl J Med. 2008 Mar 6;358(10):985-7
pubmed: 18322280
N Engl J Med. 2018 Feb 15;378(7):595-597
pubmed: 29443668
JAMA. 2015 Oct 27;314(16):1691-2
pubmed: 26302152
JAMA. 2006 Aug 9;296(6):655-60
pubmed: 16896108
Heart Rhythm. 2019 Aug;16(8):1215-1222
pubmed: 30772531
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019 Feb;12(2):e004666
pubmed: 30764652
Heart Rhythm. 2007 Jul;4(7):892-6
pubmed: 17599673
N Engl J Med. 2012 Mar 8;366(10):873-5
pubmed: 22332951
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2011 Sep;22(9):1070-2
pubmed: 21385268
Heart Rhythm. 2012 May;9(5):742-9
pubmed: 22209723
Med Decis Making. 2009 Nov-Dec;29(6):661-77
pubmed: 19684288
Heart Rhythm. 2012 Aug;9(8):1227-35
pubmed: 22449741
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Mar 22;67(11):1358-68
pubmed: 26988958