Electrical abnormalities with St. Jude/Abbott pacing leads: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Prevalence and management of electrical lead abnormalities in cardiac implantable electronic device leads

“…The most common observation was lead noise with normal impedance. 13 Abbott leads connected to a non-Abbott generator did have a lower incidence of abnormalities (4.7% vs 8.0%), but this remained higher than that of other manufacturers (1.1%–5.5%). 13 We found a higher incidence of ELA in Abbott leads connected to Abbott devices than those with Medtronic devices, as well as higher rates of ELA in atrial leads compared with right ventricular leads.…”

“… 13 Abbott leads connected to a non-Abbott generator did have a lower incidence of abnormalities (4.7% vs 8.0%), but this remained higher than that of other manufacturers (1.1%–5.5%). 13 We found a higher incidence of ELA in Abbott leads connected to Abbott devices than those with Medtronic devices, as well as higher rates of ELA in atrial leads compared with right ventricular leads. This corroborates previous studies, which suggested that a proportion of lead noise observed is due to Abbott device algorithms that are more sensitive to detection of electrical lead noise, as may be seen with atrial-specific algorithms.…”

“… 14 The current study offers a balanced representation of Abbott and Medtronic leads, at 57% and 43% of leads analyzed, respectively. This is in contrast to the prior study in which 75% of the leads analyzed were Abbott manufactured, 13 leading to a potential for selection bias due to overrepresentation of Abbott leads. 15 Several other studies have reported similar findings with the Tendril pacing lead and posited whether the Optim insulation may explain some of these observations.…”

“…Prior studies have examined the risk of ELAs and have observed varying results. Khatiwala and colleagues 13 performed a meta-analysis examining non–implantation-related lead malfunction rates in 14,579 leads, finding lead abnormalities in 5% of leads, with a higher incidence in Abbott leads (relative risk 7.81, 95% CI 3.21–19.0). The most common observation was lead noise with normal impedance.…”