Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2017
Validation of defibrillator lead performance registry data: insight from the Danish Pacemaker and ICD Register.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kristensen Anders Elgaard, Larsen Jacob Moesgaard, Nielsen Jens Cosedis, Johansen Jens Brock, Haarbo Jens, Petersen Helen Høgh, Riahi Sam
Аннотация
AIMS: The validity of registry data on defibrillator lead performance is described only sparsely, despite its clinical importance. This study investigated the validity of defibrillator lead performance registry data in a nationwide and population-based registry.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified all reported surgical interventions due to defibrillator lead events in the Danish Pacemaker and ICD Register (DPIR) from 2000 to 2013. Medical records of all patients (n = 753) were examined blinded for 5 predefined intervention types and 18 reasons for lead intervention. The overall level of agreement for the types of lead intervention had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 89.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 87.0-91.5%] and an adjusted agreement (κ value) of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77-0.85) representing an almost perfect match. Regarding the reasons for lead intervention, the overall PPV was 63.0% (95% CI: 54.8-61.7%) with a κ value of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.55-0.64) representing a moderate match with only few subcategories having low PPV. By redistribution of the specific reasons for lead interventions into three categories commonly used to report lead performance, the overall PPV improved to 87.9% (95% CI: 85.2-90.2%) with a κ value of 0.82 (95% CI:0.78-0.86) representing an almost perfect match.
CONCLUSION: The validity of data on defibrillator lead performance recorded in the DPIR is excellent for the specific types of lead intervention and good for the specific reasons for defibrillator lead intervention. The validity of the less detailed overall reasons for lead interventions commonly used to report lead performance is also excellent. These findings indicate high registry data quality appropriate for scientific analysis and industry-independent post-marketing surveillance.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified all reported surgical interventions due to defibrillator lead events in the Danish Pacemaker and ICD Register (DPIR) from 2000 to 2013. Medical records of all patients (n = 753) were examined blinded for 5 predefined intervention types and 18 reasons for lead intervention. The overall level of agreement for the types of lead intervention had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 89.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 87.0-91.5%] and an adjusted agreement (κ value) of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77-0.85) representing an almost perfect match. Regarding the reasons for lead intervention, the overall PPV was 63.0% (95% CI: 54.8-61.7%) with a κ value of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.55-0.64) representing a moderate match with only few subcategories having low PPV. By redistribution of the specific reasons for lead interventions into three categories commonly used to report lead performance, the overall PPV improved to 87.9% (95% CI: 85.2-90.2%) with a κ value of 0.82 (95% CI:0.78-0.86) representing an almost perfect match.
CONCLUSION: The validity of data on defibrillator lead performance recorded in the DPIR is excellent for the specific types of lead intervention and good for the specific reasons for defibrillator lead intervention. The validity of the less detailed overall reasons for lead interventions commonly used to report lead performance is also excellent. These findings indicate high registry data quality appropriate for scientific analysis and industry-independent post-marketing surveillance.