• Something wrong with this record ?

Postupy u hlášených "rizikových" elektrod systému ICD

Parkash R, et al.

Language Czech Country Czech Republic

Document type Comparative Study, Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND: It has been observed that replacement of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator in response to a device advisory may be associated with a substantial rate of complications, including death. The risk of lead revision in response to a lead advisory has not been determined previously. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation and follow-up centers from the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society Device Advisory Committee were surveyed to assess complication rates as a result of lead revisions due to the Sprint Fidelis advisory issued in October 2007. As of June 1, 2009, there had been 310 lead failures found in 6237 Sprint Fidelis leads in Canada (4.97%) over a follow-up of 40 months. There were 469 leads to be revised, 66% for confirmed fracture. Of the patients who underwent revision, 95% had a new lead inserted, whereas 4% had a pace/sense lead added. The lead was removed in 248 cases (53%), by simple traction in 61% and by laser lead extraction in 33%. Complications were encountered in 14.5% of the lead revisions; 7.25% of these were major, whereas 7.25% were minor. There were 2 deaths (0.43%). The overall risk of complications (19.8%) was greater in those who underwent lead removal at the time of revision than in those whose leads were abandoned (8.6%; P=0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: The overall rate of major complications that arose from lead revision due to the Sprint Fidelis advisory was significant. This must be taken into account when lead revision is planned in those patients who have not yet demonstrated an abnormality in lead performance.

Bibliography, etc.

Lit.: 1

000      
00000naa 2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc11000493
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20111210201453.0
008      
110203s2010 xr e cze||
009      
AR
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $c ABA008 $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a cze $b eng
044    __
$a xr
100    1_
$a Parkash, R.
245    10
$a Postupy u hlášených "rizikových" elektrod systému ICD / $c Parkash R, et al.
314    __
$a Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia. parkashr@cdha.nshealth.ca
504    __
$a Lit.: 1
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: It has been observed that replacement of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator in response to a device advisory may be associated with a substantial rate of complications, including death. The risk of lead revision in response to a lead advisory has not been determined previously. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation and follow-up centers from the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society Device Advisory Committee were surveyed to assess complication rates as a result of lead revisions due to the Sprint Fidelis advisory issued in October 2007. As of June 1, 2009, there had been 310 lead failures found in 6237 Sprint Fidelis leads in Canada (4.97%) over a follow-up of 40 months. There were 469 leads to be revised, 66% for confirmed fracture. Of the patients who underwent revision, 95% had a new lead inserted, whereas 4% had a pace/sense lead added. The lead was removed in 248 cases (53%), by simple traction in 61% and by laser lead extraction in 33%. Complications were encountered in 14.5% of the lead revisions; 7.25% of these were major, whereas 7.25% were minor. There were 2 deaths (0.43%). The overall risk of complications (19.8%) was greater in those who underwent lead removal at the time of revision than in those whose leads were abandoned (8.6%; P=0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: The overall rate of major complications that arose from lead revision due to the Sprint Fidelis advisory was significant. This must be taken into account when lead revision is planned in those patients who have not yet demonstrated an abnormality in lead performance.
650    _2
$a poradní výbory $x normy $7 D026683
650    _2
$a defibrilátory implantabilní $x škodlivé účinky $7 D017147
650    _2
$a schvalování záměrů $x normy $7 D018795
650    _2
$a implantované elektrody $x normy $7 D004567
650    _2
$a selhání zařízení $7 D004868
650    _2
$a následné studie $7 D005500
650    _2
$a srdeční zástava $x diagnóza $x epidemiologie $x etiologie $7 D006323
650    _2
$a srdeční frekvence $7 D006339
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a pooperační komplikace $x dietoterapie $x epidemiologie $x etiologie $7 D011183
650    _2
$a společnosti lékařské $x normy $7 D012955
651    _2
$a Kanada $7 D002170
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
773    0_
$w MED00012706 $t Clinical cardiology alert $g Roč. 4, č. 5 (2010), s. 38 $x 1213-2586
787    18
$w bmc11000494 $i Recenze v: $t Komentář [k článku Postupy u hlášených "rizikových" elektrod systému ICD]
910    __
$a ABA008 $b B 2242 $c 407 a $y 7
990    __
$a 20110202063614 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20110228123058 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 827524 $s 692360
BAS    __
$a 3
BMC    __
$a 2010 $b 4 $c 5 $m Clinical Cardiology Alert $x MED00012706 $d 38
LZP    __
$a 2011-08/ipme

Find record