Annual Rate of Transvenous Defibrillation Lead Defects in Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators Over a Period of >10 Years

Abstract

Background— The number of patients with longer follow-up after implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator is increasing continuously. Defibrillation lead failure is a typical long-term complication. Therefore, the long-term reliability of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads has become an increasing concern. The aim of the present study was to assess the annual rate of transvenous defibrillation lead defects related to follow-up time after lead implantation. Methods and Results— A total of 990 consecutive patients who underwent first implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator between 1992 and May 2005 were analyzed. Median follow-up time was 934 days (interquartile range, 368 to 1870). Overall, 148 defibrillation leads (15%) failed during the follow-up. The estimated lead survival rates at 5 and 8 years after implantation were 85% and 60%, respectively. The annual failure rate increased progressively with time after implantation and reached 20% in 10-year-old leads ( P <0.001). Lead defects affected newer as well as older models. Patients with lead defects were 3 years younger at implantation and more often female. Multiple lead implantation was associated with a trend to a higher rate of defibrillation lead defects ( P =0.06). The major lead complications were insulation defects (56%), lead fractures (12%), loss of ventricular capture (11%), abnormal lead impedance (10%), and sensing failure (10%). Conclusions— An increasing annual lead failure rate is noted primarily during long-term follow-up and reached 20% in 10-year-old leads. Patients with lead defects are younger and more often female.

Avoiding Untimely Implantable Cardioverter/Defibrillator Implantation by Intensified Heart Failure Therapy Optimization Supported by the Wearable Cardioverter/Defibrillator—The PROLONG Study

“…However, patients may already be at risk for SCD during initiation and optimization of heart failure medication. On the other hand, too early ICD implantation exposes the patient to the risk of early and late complications 18, 19. A substudy of the MADIT‐II trial showed a greater benefit of primary preventive ICD implantation after remote MI 20.…”

Risk Factors and Temporal Trends of Complications Associated With Transvenous Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator Leads

“…A percentage of transvenous system malfunctions is attributable to lead‐related problems and may require additional intervention 5. The transvenous ICD lead has been called the “weakest” link in ICD therapy and the most frequent source of serious complications associated with ICDs 6, 7, 8…”

Primary prevention with the ICD in clinical practice: not as straightforward as the guidelines suggest?

“…18,19 Also lead longevity is a major concern in the long term: Kleemann et al reported that only 60% of leads functioned properly after an eight-year follow-up. 20 Secondly, most patients are not aware of an imminent risk of sudden death when offered ICD therapy, and labelling them as such may profoundly influence the quality of life. It is therefore not surprising that up to 38% of ICD recipients experience symptoms that meet criteria for anxiety disorders, with younger patients and those receiving multiple shocks at greater risk.…”