Passive-fixation lead failure rates and long-term patient mortality in subjects implanted with Sprint Fidelis electrodes

Vollmann, Dirk; Woronowicz, Sandra; Kmiec, Lukasz; Jung, Klaus; Zenker, Dieter; Seegers, Joachim; Sossalla, Samuel; Dorenkamp, Marc; Sohns, Christian; Lüthje, Lars; Hasenfuß, Gerd; Zabel, Markus

doi:10.1093/europace/eut185

Cited by 12 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the literature, there are slightly lower mortality rates in SF recipients [6]. The trends of this study show quite the same results as in the literature -in non-survivor groups, more frequent implantation was in secondary prevention [9,23] and in older ages [9] than in survivors.…”

Section: Mortalitysupporting

confidence: 87%

“…In present analysis lead failure rate was 9% at 5 years, which is a relatively low value compared with other literature [6,7,12,15,16]. A relatively low lead failure rate was achieved with implantations which involved only double-coil lead in all patients.…”

Section: Lead Failurecontrasting

confidence: 51%

“…Most of them presented active fixation lead failure rate which was 9.1-16.4% in the 5-year follow-up [7,12,13]. By contrast, passive fixation lead failure ranges from 4.2% to 14.4% in the 5-year observation [6,7,10,14].…”

Section: Lead Failurementioning

confidence: 96%

“…Deaths were described as cardiac, non-cardiac and unknown, according to their cause [5], and the status of "sudden" was attributed, provided the death occurred in less than 1 h from the beginning of symptom presentation [6].…”

Section: Patients Follow-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lead failure was diagnosed when one or more of the well established criteria [6][7][8][9] were fulfilled: (i) a sudden rise in long-term pacing or highvoltage impedance, (ii) electrical noise artefacts as manifested by non-physiological signals on the electrogram or by device diagnostics (e.g. nonphysiological short intervals and/or recurrent nonsustained ventricular tachycardia with intervals usually < 220 ms), (iii) failure to sense R-waves or ineffective electrical therapy due to an apparent structural lead defect.…”

Section: Patients Follow-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Sprint Fidelis implantable cardioverter-defibrillators lead patient management and survival: Single center study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 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) (Cardiol J 2017; 24, 3: 259-265)

show abstract