Failure of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads: A matter of lead size?

Cable externalization and electrical failure of the Riata family of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][26][27][28] Based on random effects modeling, the overall rate of EF was 6.3% (95% CI 4.7%-8.2%). Significant heterogeneity was again observed with I 2 = 89.507.…”

Axillary vein puncture using fluoroscopic landmarks: a safe and effective approach for implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads

“…The study outcome was a composite endpoint of successful axillary vein puncture without the need of venography and freedom from acute complications (pneumothorax, hemothorax, cardiac perforation) and device-related complications (lead failure/lead fracture, pocket decubitus, pocket infection, pocket hematoma, thrombosis, lead dislodgement or device failure) during follow-up. Lead failure/fracture was defined as a sudden change of impedance (≥50 % as compared with chronic values) and/or electrical noise artifact from sensed non-physiologic, make-break potentials [20].…”

Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter‐Defibrillator (ICD) Lead Performance: A Meta‐Analysis of Observational Studies

“…Nevertheless, despite their safer reputations, failures are inevitably reported. Recent studies suggested that thinner leads (<8F) may be associated with higher likelihood of lead failure . It remains to be explained whether this problem is simply due to lead caliber alone (and concomitantly more insulating material and separation between the lumens in thicker leads) or specific design deficiencies in the 2 families of leads with previously known issues (Riata and Sprint Fidelis).…”