Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Electrical abnormalities with St. Jude/Abbott pacing leads: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Khatiwala, Roshni V; Mullins, Elizabeth; Fan, Dali; Srivatsa, Uma N; Dhruva, Sanket S; Oesterle, Adam.
Afiliação
  • Khatiwala RV; Department of Internal Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California.
  • Mullins E; Department of Internal Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California.
  • Fan D; Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California.
  • Srivatsa UN; Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California.
  • Dhruva SS; Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California San Francisco - San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California.
  • Oesterle A; Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California San Francisco - San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: adam.oesterle@ucsf.edu.
Heart Rhythm ; 18(12): 2061-2069, 2021 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34461304
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Although there is a paucity of contemporary data on pacemaker lead survival rates, small studies suggest that some leads may have higher malfunction rates than do others.

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of this study was to determine the malfunction rates of current pacemaker leads.

METHODS:

A meta-analysis including studies that examined the non-implant-related lead malfunction rates of current commercially available active fixation pacemaker leads was performed. An electronic search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Embase was performed. DerSimonian and Laird random effects models were used.

RESULTS:

Eight studies with a total of 14,579 leads were included. Abbott accounted for 10,838 (74%), Medtronic 2510 (17%), Boston Scientific 849 (6%), and MicroPort 382 (3%) leads. The weighted mean follow-up period was 3.6 years. Lead abnormalities occurred in 5.0% of all leads, 6.1% of Abbott leads, 1.1% of Medtronic, 1.4% of Boston Scientific, and 5.5% of MicroPort. The most common lead abnormality was lead noise with normal impedance. Abbott leads were associated with an increased risk of abnormalities (relative risk [RR] 7.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.21-19.04), reprogramming (RR 7.95; 95% CI 3.55-17.82), and lead revision or extraction (RR 8.91; 95% CI 3.36-23.60). Abbott leads connected to an Abbott generator had the highest abnormality rate (8.0%) followed by Abbott leads connected to a non-Abbott generator (4.7%) and non-Abbott leads connected to an Abbott generator (0.4%).

CONCLUSIONS:

Abbott leads are associated with an increased risk of abnormalities compared with leads of other manufacturers, primarily manifesting as lead noise with normal impedance, and are associated with an increased risk of lead reprogramming and lead revision or extraction.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Marca-Passo Artificial / Arritmias Cardíacas Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Marca-Passo Artificial / Arritmias Cardíacas Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article