Long-term follow-up of patients undergoing add-on pacing/sensing lead vs. ICD lead implantation for failed IS-1/DF-1 ICD leads: a single centre experience.
Acta Cardiol
; : 1-6, 2023 Nov 30.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-38032259
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
Intracardiac defibrillator/cardioverter (ICD) is a cornerstone device for prevention of sudden cardiac death. Lead failure (LF) is one of the most important long-term complications. In this study, we sought to investigate mid-to-long term clinical, device and lead characteristics of patients who have undergone pacing sensing lead (PSL) implantation for an ICD LF and compare them to the patients who have undergone a new ICD lead implantation.METHODS:
In this retrospective, single centre, case-control study, we have screened all ICD patients presenting with LF. Patients with IS-1/DF-1 ICD leads with intact high-voltage conductor were included in the study group, while other patients were included in the control arm. Study group patients underwent PSL implantation, control group patients underwent ICD lead implantation.RESULTS:
Thirty patients were included in each arm of the study. The mean duration of follow-up after intervention was similar in both groups (47.6 months ± 20.4 vs. 46.1 months ± 25.7, p = .808). The total failure rate was not different between two groups (p = .640). Rate of high-voltage conductor disfunction was also similar between two arms 1 (3.3%) in PSL arm and 0 in control arm (p = .303).CONCLUSIONS:
Addition of a PSL for IS-1/DF-1 ICD LF with normal high-voltage conductor measurements is a viable treatment option with similar long-term results to addition of a new ICD lead. This approach is potentially less costly, technically less demanding, and, in case of concomitant extraction procedure, associated with less acute complication risk.
Texto completo:
1
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Idioma:
En
Ano de publicação:
2023
Tipo de documento:
Article