Combined leadless pacemaker and subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator to manage recurrent transvenous system failures

Baroni, Matteo; Colombo, Giulia; Testoni, Alessio; Arupi, Michele; Lunati, Maurizio; Cattafi, Giuseppe

doi:10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.03.002

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, a subsequent upgrade to a transvenous ICD is possible whenever indicated, although the risk of an upgrade procedure has to be considered. In few cases, subcutaneous ICD were combined successfully with CRT‐, His bundle‐, or leadless pacemaker 11‐13 . In patients with left ventricular dysfunction following myocardial infarction, implanted loop recorder data revealed high‐degree AV blocks in 10% and sinus arrest in 5% after 2 years 14 .…”

Section: Decision‐making For Implantation Of Ntv‐icdmentioning

confidence: 99%

State‐of‐the‐art consensus on non‐transvenous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator therapy

Schukro

Santer

Prenner

et al. 2020

Clinical Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the last decade, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) systems with nontransvenous leads were developed in order to minimize complications related to the cardiovascular position of transvenous ICD leads. This national expert consensus gives an overview of potential indications for the implantation of non-transvenous ICD systems, and provides specific recommendations for implantation, follow-up, and complication management in patients with subcutaneous ICD. Regarding particular issues like the necessity for shock efficacy testing, or the clinical outcome as compared to transvenous ICD, randomized data are expected in the near future.

show abstract

Section: Decision‐making For Implantation Of Ntv‐icdmentioning

confidence: 99%

State‐of‐the‐art consensus on non‐transvenous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator therapy

Schukro

Santer

Prenner

et al. 2020

Clinical Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Though not specifically involving the CHD population, 2019 saw the release of several additional studies examining the real-world combination of leadless pacemakers and S-ICDs for both the application of bradycardia pacing as well as the termination of ventricular tachycardia with antitachycardia pacing. Ito et al, 5 Ljunstrom et al, 6 and Baroni et al 7 all described the successful implantation and midterm follow-up outcomes of patients who received an S-ICD and the Micra™ leadless pacemaker (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). The patient described by Ito et al had prosthetic valve endocarditis precluding transvenous pacing but tolerated leadless pacing with no evidence of S-ICD crosstalk and displayed appropriate eligibility in all sensing vectors (ie, primary, secondary, and alternative) during ventricular pacing.…”

Section: Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

State of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Congenital Heart Disease: A 2019 Update

Alvensleben¹,

Collins²

2019

J Innov Cardiac Rhythm Manage.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevalence of adult congenital heart disease (CHD) is directly attributable to the success of pediatric cardiology and congenital cardiac surgery in diagnosing and managing cardiac conditions in childhood. The observed success with this population has resulted in the application of electrophysiological techniques and therapies to an expanding population of patients, bypassing previous limitations secondary to size, underlying knowledge base, or both. Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are no exception and the last decade has seen a remarkable expansion into the CHD population. The 2014 Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) expert consensus statement on the recognition and management of arrhythmias in adult CHD 1 and the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines for the management of adults with CHD 2 underscore that the care of these patients continues to become formalized. The year 2019 saw the release of several studies examining the impact of CIEDs in CHD with a focus placed on subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs), epicardial devices, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) systems, and leadless pacing. Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillatorsThe release of the S-ICD was heralded as a result of its utility in patients with limited vascular access and contraindications to the implantation of transvenous systems. This, the lack of intravascular components, and the concomitant need for lead extraction made the S-ICD particularly favorable in the CHD population, where patients are typically younger and frequently present with atypical venous return. This year saw the release of several larger series describing the acute and midterm outcomes of S-ICD implantation and served to enhance our understanding of this device type in this challenging group of patients.At the 2019 HRS Scientific Sessions, a collaborative presentation organized together with the PACES described 116 pediatric and adult patients who had undergone S-ICD implantation, including 37 who had CHD. 3 Among the entire cohort, the investigators found that 97.9% of patients experienced a successful first-shock cardioversion during implant testing and 92.5% demonstrated the delivery of appropriate therapy during a follow-up period of 33 months ± 29 months. Complications were comparable to those reported in other studies of CIEDs in this population, with 18.9% of patients experiencing any of a variety of selected complications. Notably, infections requiring device removal were low (1.7%) and no cases of endocarditis were 3940

show abstract

“…The main disadvantage is the current impossibility to deliver Anti-Tachycardia-Pacing (ATP), and long-term conventional pacing. Nevertheless, these systems will be coupled with leadless pacemakers in the near future to overcome this specific, but important issue (32).…”

Section: Advances In Defibrillationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological advances in cardiac pacing and defibrillation

Bun¹,

Squara²,

Scarlatti³

et al. 2019

HVT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since more than a half century, cardiac pacing and defibrillation represent a field in constant evolution, and they have shown some great technological advances from its conception to its methods of insertion. In this review, the recent developments about the accesses for pacemakers and ICD will be described: the axillary and the femoral vein. The His bundle pacing and the advantages of the entirely subcutaneous defibrillator will also be presented.

show abstract

Combined leadless pacemaker and subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator to manage recurrent transvenous system failures

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

State‐of‐the‐art consensus on non‐transvenous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator therapy

State‐of‐the‐art consensus on non‐transvenous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator therapy

State of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Congenital Heart Disease: A 2019 Update

Technological advances in cardiac pacing and defibrillation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About