Cardiology journal · 2016
Sprint Fidelis implantable cardioverter-defibrillators lead patient management and survival: Single center study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Grabowski Marcin, Rokicki Jakub K, Gajda Sylwia, Januszkiewicz Łukasz, Cacko Andrzej, Stolarz Przemysław, Opolski Grzegorz
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Over the last several years significant rises in the use of implanted cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) have also resulted in a number of associated complications. This number includes lead failure. Sprint Fidelis (SF) ICD lead is regarded as a lead with elevated failure risk. Every center acting in accordance with the guidelines should observe patients more thoroughly especially with recalled leads and run a registry of their follow-up. The aim of this research was to present follow-up of the patients with SF leads (types 6948, 6949) from a single implantation center.
METHODS: There were 36 SF leads implanted in 36 patients. Mean follow-up period was 76 months (IQR 40.3-86.8). Patients were subjected to regular check-ups in 3 to 6 month intervals.
RESULTS: Patients were implanted at a median age of 66.5 years and majority of them had ischemic cardiomyopathy (72%). A majority of the studied population were men (72.2%). Predominantly dual-chamber ICD (ICD-DR) were implanted (50% ICD-DR vs. 47.2% ICD-VR). The guidelines for management of patients implanted with SF were fully implemented. During the follow-up 14 (38.9%) patients died. No deaths were noted that could be attributed to lead failure. In 5 cases lead failure was identified and of these 4 leads were replaced. Median time from implantation to the detection of lead dysfunction was 52 months (IQR 49; 83). The symptoms of failure consisted of: inappropriate shocks, alternating ventricular lead signal, or loss of ventricular stimulation.
CONCLUSIONS: The follow-up of patients with recalled SF leads in a single center supports that implementation SF management guidelines could be effective in clinical practice.
METHODS: There were 36 SF leads implanted in 36 patients. Mean follow-up period was 76 months (IQR 40.3-86.8). Patients were subjected to regular check-ups in 3 to 6 month intervals.
RESULTS: Patients were implanted at a median age of 66.5 years and majority of them had ischemic cardiomyopathy (72%). A majority of the studied population were men (72.2%). Predominantly dual-chamber ICD (ICD-DR) were implanted (50% ICD-DR vs. 47.2% ICD-VR). The guidelines for management of patients implanted with SF were fully implemented. During the follow-up 14 (38.9%) patients died. No deaths were noted that could be attributed to lead failure. In 5 cases lead failure was identified and of these 4 leads were replaced. Median time from implantation to the detection of lead dysfunction was 52 months (IQR 49; 83). The symptoms of failure consisted of: inappropriate shocks, alternating ventricular lead signal, or loss of ventricular stimulation.
CONCLUSIONS: The follow-up of patients with recalled SF leads in a single center supports that implementation SF management guidelines could be effective in clinical practice.