Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Long-Term Evaluation of Biotronik Linox and Linox(smart) Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Leads.
Good, Eric D; Cakulev, Ivan; Orlov, Michael V; Hirsh, David; Simeles, John; Mohr, Kelly; Moll, Phil; Bloom, Heather.
Afiliação
  • Good ED; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
  • Cakulev I; University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
  • Orlov MV; Steward St. Elizabeth's Medical Center, Brighton, MA, USA.
  • Hirsh D; Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
  • Simeles J; Biotronik, Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA.
  • Mohr K; Biotronik, Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA.
  • Moll P; Biotronik, Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA.
  • Bloom H; Emory University and Atlanta VA Medical Center, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol ; 27(6): 735-42, 2016 06.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26990515
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Expert consensus holds that post-market, systematic surveillance of ICD leads is essential to ensure confirmation of adequate lead performance. GALAXY (NCT00836589) and CELESTIAL (NCT00810264) are ongoing multicenter, prospective, non-randomized registries conducted to confirm the long-term safety and reliability of Biotronik leads. METHODS AND

RESULTS:

ICD and CRT-D patients are followed for Linox and Linox(smart) ICD lead performance and safety for 5 years post-implant. All procedural and system-related adverse events (AEs) were assessed at each follow-up, along with lead electrical parameters. An independent CEC of EPs adjudicated AEs to determine AE category and lead relatedness. The analysis used categories of lead observations per ISO 5841-2 (Third edition). A total of 3,933 leads were implanted in 3,840 patients (73.0% male, mean age 67.0 ± 12.2 years) at 146 US centers. The estimated cumulative survival probability was 96.3% at 5 years after implant for Linox leads and 96.6% at 4 years after implant for Linox(smart) leads. A comparison of the Linox and Linox(smart) survival functions did not find evidence of a difference (P = 0.2155). The most common AEs were oversensing (23, 0.58%), conductor fracture (14, 0.36%), failure to capture (13, 0.33%), lead dislodgement (12, 0.31%), insulation breach (10, 0.25%), and abnormal pacing impedance (8, 0.20%).

CONCLUSIONS:

Linox and Linox(smart) ICD leads are safe, reliable and infrequently associated with lead-related AEs. Additionally, estimated cumulative survival probability is clinically acceptable and well within industry standards. Ongoing data collection will confirm the longer-term safety and performance of the Linox family of ICD leads.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Arritmias Cardíacas / Cardioversão Elétrica / Desfibriladores Implantáveis Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Observational_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Assunto da revista: ANGIOLOGIA / CARDIOLOGIA / FISIOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Arritmias Cardíacas / Cardioversão Elétrica / Desfibriladores Implantáveis Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Observational_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Assunto da revista: ANGIOLOGIA / CARDIOLOGIA / FISIOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos