Stanley Tung

Complications associated with defibrillation threshold testing: The Canadian experience

BACKGROUND Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing has traditionally been a routine part of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation, despite a lack of compelling evidence that it predicts or improves outcomes. In the past, when devices were much less reliable, DFT testing seemed prudent; however, modern ICD systems have such a high rate of successful defibrillation that many electrophysiologists now question whether DFT testing is still worthwhile, particularly since DFT testing may now be the highest acute risk component of ICD implantation. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to systematically document complications directly attributable to intraoperative DFT testing. METHODS We obtained data on DFT-related complications from all 21 adult ICD implant centers in Canada, covering the period from January 1, 2000, to September 30, 2006. RESULTS There were a total of 19,067 ICD implants in Canada during the study period. There were three DFT testing-related deaths, five DFT testing-related strokes, and 27 episodes that required prolonged resuscitation. Two patients had significant clinical sequelae after prolonged resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS The risk of severe complications from intraoperative DFT testing appears small, even allowing for the underestimation of its true rate with the current study methodology. These slight but measurable risks must be considered when assessing the risk-benefit ratio of the procedure. Additional data from ongoing prospective ICD registries and/or clinical trials are required.

Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation versus Escalation of Antiarrhythmic Drugs

BACKGROUND Recurrent ventricular tachycardia among survivors of myocardial infarction with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is frequent despite antiarrhythmic drug therapy. The most effective approach to management of this problem is uncertain. METHODS We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and an ICD who had ventricular tachycardia despite the use of antiarrhythmic drugs. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either catheter ablation (ablation group) with continuation of baseline antiarrhythmic medications or escalated antiarrhythmic drug therapy (escalated-therapy group). In the escalated-therapy group, amiodarone was initiated if another agent had been used previously. The dose of amiodarone was increased if it had been less than 300 mg per day or mexiletine was added if the dose was already at least 300 mg per day. The primary outcome was a composite of death, three or more documented episodes of ventricular tachycardia within 24 hours (ventricular tachycardia storm), or appropriate ICD shock. RESULTS Of the 259 patients who were enrolled, 132 were assigned to the ablation group and 127 to the escalated-therapy group. During a mean (±SD) of 27.9±17.1 months of follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 59.1% of patients in the ablation group and 68.5% of those in the escalated-therapy group (hazard ratio in the ablation group, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 0.98; P=0.04). There was no significant between-group difference in mortality. There were two cardiac perforations and three cases of major bleeding in the ablation group and two deaths from pulmonary toxic effects and one from hepatic dysfunction in the escalated-therapy group. CONCLUSIONS In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and an ICD who had ventricular tachycardia despite antiarrhythmic drug therapy, there was a significantly lower rate of the composite primary outcome of death, ventricular tachycardia storm, or appropriate ICD shock among patients undergoing catheter ablation than among those receiving an escalation in antiarrhythmic drug therapy. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; VANISH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00905853.).

Outcome of the Fidelis implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead advisory: A report from the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society Device Advisory Committee

BACKGROUND The Medtronic Sprint Fidelis family of leads has recently been the subject of a widespread advisory. Lead failure rates are estimated at 2.3% at 30 months, 2.6 times the failure rate of the reference Medtronic 6947 lead. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to contact pediatric and adult implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implant centers across Canada to determine the short-term response to the October 15, 2007 Medtronic Fidelis lead advisory. METHODS All centers completed an 11-part survey to assess the frequency and presentation of lead failure, operator characteristics, and centers response. RESULTS Lead failure was noted in 80 (1.29%) of 6,181 patients at 21.0 months, with inappropriate shocks experienced in 45 (56%) of the 80 patients (overall risk 0.73%). No deaths were attributed to lead failure. Sensing was the primary form of failure, seen in 60 leads (75%), with pacing failure in 10 (13%), and high-voltage failure in 15 (19%). Assessment of the previous routine ICD interrogation prior to the advisory or lead failure demonstrated evidence of altered lead performance in only 8 (10%) of the 80 leads. Inappropriate shocks typically were multiple (median 7, range 1-122), with a single shock seen in only 5 patients. Lead failure was noted in 18 of 23 centers, representing 89.8% of leads implanted, with at least one failure noted in 15 of 16 centers that implanted more than 200 leads. Forty-seven of the 135 operators in the 23 institutions implanted the 80 leads that subsequently failed. Only 16 operators were involved in more than a single lead that subsequently failed; seven operators participated in three or more leads that subsequently failed. Seven centers planned to replace leads in most pacing-dependent patients, and two centers planned to replace leads in patients unable to hear the alert tone. CONCLUSION This national experience suggests a Fidelis lead failure rate of 1.29% at 21 months, most often presenting with multiple inappropriate shocks without evidence of impending failure from routine lead follow-up. Lead failure did not appear to cluster around specific operators or around high-volume or low-volume implant centers.

Outcome of advisory implantable cardioverter-defibrillator replacement: one-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) generator advisories present management dilemmas for physicians regarding competing risks of ICD failure and replacement-related complications. There is currently a paucity of long-term data concerning the complications associated with advisory ICD replacement. OBJECTIVE In a large multicenter advisory ICD generator replacement cohort followed for 12 months, we aimed to assess replacement-related complications by performing a case-control determination of complication risk factors to identify characteristics that could assist with advisory ICD replacement decision making. METHODS Twelve large ICD implanting centers reviewed the 1-year follow-up outcome of advisory ICDs replaced between October 2004 and October 2005. The complication cohort was characterized and compared in a nested case-control analysis with age- and gender-matched controls without complications from the same replacement population. RESULTS At the 12 participating institutions, 451 of 2635 advisory ICD devices were replaced (17.1%). Over 355 +/- 204 days of follow-up, there were 41 (9.1%) complications; 27 (5.9%) required reoperation and included two deaths. There were 14 minor complications (3.1%). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the number of previous pocket procedures was associated with an increase in complications and that combined consultant and fellow operators was associated with a decrease in complications compared with a single operator alone. CONCLUSIONS Complications from advisory ICD generator replacement are frequent and include infection and, rarely, death. The risk of replacement is increased in patients with multiple previous pocket procedures.

ALternate Site Cardiac ResYNChronization (ALSYNC): a prospective and multicentre study of left ventricular endocardial pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS The ALternate Site Cardiac ResYNChronization (ALSYNC) study evaluated the feasibility and safety of left ventricular endocardial pacing (LVEP) using a market-released pacing lead implanted via a single pectoral access by a novel atrial transseptal lead delivery system. METHODS AND RESULTS ALSYNC was a prospective clinical investigation with a minimum of 12-month follow-up in 18 centres of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)-indicated patients, who had failed or were unsuitable for conventional CRT. The ALSYNC system comprises the investigational lead delivery system and LVEP lead. Patients required warfarin therapy post-implant. The primary study objective was safety at 6-month follow-up, which was defined as freedom from complications related to the lead delivery system, implant procedure, or the lead ≥70%. The ALSYNC study enrolled 138 patients. The LVEP lead implant success rate was 89.4%. Freedom from complications meeting the definition of primary endpoint was 82.2% at 6 months (95% CI 75.6-88.8%). In the study, 14 transient ischaemic attacks (9 patients, 6.8%), 5 non-disabling strokes (5 patients, 3.8%), and 23 deaths (17.4%) were observed. No death was from a primary endpoint complication. At 6 months, the New York Heart Association class improved in 59% of patients, and 55% had LV end-systolic volume reduction of 15% or greater. Those patients enrolled after CRT non-response showed similar improvement with LVEP. CONCLUSIONS The ALSYNC study demonstrates clinical feasibility, and provides an early indication of possible benefit and risk of LVEP. CLINICAL TRIAL NCT01277783.

Failure rate of the Riata lead under advisory: A report from the CHRS Device Committee

BACKGROUND A unique form of lead failure has been described in the Riata (8-F) and Riata ST (7-F) silicone defibrillation lead degradation of the outer insulation, resulting in the externalization of conductor cables. OBJECTIVE To assess rates of lead revision due to lead failure in Riata leads affected by the Riata advisory. METHODS Nineteen implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implant and follow-up centers were surveyed. RESULTS As of March 1, 2012, there were 5043 known affected leads implanted in Canada. Data on 4358 (86.4%) leads were obtained; 65.3% of these were Riata (8-F) and 32.4% were Riata ST (7-F) leads. The median time from implant to last follow-up was 5 years. Electrical abnormalities were reported in 4.6% of the affected leads; 8.0% of these were found to have concomitant radiographic evidence of externalization. The rate of electrical failure was higher in the 8-F (5.2%) vs 7-F (3.3%) leads (P = .007). Oversensing with or without inappropriate shocks was reported in 39.8% of the leads with confirmed failure. Abnormally high or low impedance values (29.9%) and elevated pacing capture thresholds (43.8%) were frequently reported. One death (0.5%) attributed to lead failure was reported. Among the leads that were replaced, 21% were extracted. Two major complications (1.0%) were attributed to extraction of these leads. CONCLUSIONS The overall rate of lead failure in the Riata (8-F) and Riata ST (7-F) leads is higher than previously reported by using passive surveillance data. The impact of recent advisories related to these leads is not yet apparent.

Utilization of a national network for rapid response to the Medtronic Fidelis lead advisory: The Canadian Heart Rhythm Society Device Advisory Committee

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE The Canadian Heart Rhythm Society (CHRS) Device Advisory Committee was commissioned in 2006 to develop a mechanism for responding to advisories regarding cardiac rhythm device and lead performance. METHODS In the event of an advisory, the Chair classifies the advisory as urgent, semi-urgent, or routine based on the nature of the threat to the patient and the number of patients affected. The Chair uses an e-mail network with the committee members to disseminate advisory information and to assemble a consensus recommendation. Committee membership is broadly representative of the Canadian device community, including both academic and nonacademic centers, adult and pediatric specialists, and includes balanced regional representation. Recommendations are approved by the CHRS executive and made available to all implant and follow-up centers on the CHRS website. RESULTS With the Medtronic Fidelis lead advisory of October 15, 2007, the Chair classified the advisory as semi-urgent and initiated an e-mail discussion and preliminary survey of all Canadian implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) centers within 3 hours of advisory announcement. A CHRS membership statement was issued within 48 hours. Within 5 working days, sample letters to physicians and patients were posted for local adaptation and distribution. Complete data collection was obtained from all Canadian defibrillator centers. Analyses at 20, 25, 30, and 32 months suggest an accelerating course of failures (3.91% at 32 months, P <.0001), with a reduced likelihood of presentation with inappropriate shocks (from 56% to 21%, P = .0003). CONCLUSION A collaborative approach using an e-mail network provides a mechanism for a rapid national response to device advisories. The network allows collection of focused data on implanted device system performance and facilitates timely reporting of clinically relevant data to patients and clinicians.

Prognostic impact of inappropriate defibrillator shocks in a population cohort

Background There is a relative paucity of data linking inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks to adverse clinical outcomes. Objective To examine the association between inappropriate ICD shocks and mortality or heart transplantation in a large population cohort. Design, setting, patients A cohort study which included all subjects who underwent ICD implantation between 1998 and 2008 and were followed up at our institution. Main outcome measures Multivariable Cox regression analyses were conducted to investigate the effect of inappropriate shocks on the risk of death and heart transplantation. Appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapies were modelled as time-dependent covariates. Results A total of 1698 patients were included. During a median follow-up of 30 months, there were 246 (14.5%) deaths and 42 (2.5%) heart transplants. The incidence of inappropriate shocks was 10% at 1 year and 14% at 2 years. In the adjusted model, inappropriate shocks were not associated with death or transplantation (HR=0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.36, p value=0.873). In contrast, appropriate shocks were associated with adverse outcomes (HR=3.11, 95% CI 2.41 to 4.02, p value<0.001). The lack of association between inappropriate shocks and outcomes persisted for those with severely impaired left ventricular function (ejection fraction <30%) and for those receiving multiple inappropriate treatments. Conclusions In this study, we observed no association between inappropriate ICD shocks and increased mortality or heart transplantation, even among those with severely impaired cardiac function. These findings question whether inappropriate ICD shocks lead to adverse outcomes.

Early Failure of the Biotronik Linox Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Lead

The Linox and Durata implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads were introduced to British Columbia (BC) in 2008. We determined their performance and the potential risk factors for lead failure in a large population‐based patient registry.

Insight into the mechanism of failure of the Riata lead under advisory

BACKGROUND Cable externalization and insulation abrasion are known to occur with the St Jude Medical Riata leads under advisory. The distribution of these abnormalities and how they relate to clinical presentation have not been well described. OBJECTIVE In this study, we sought to determine the relationship between structural lead failure and clinical presentation by using the analysis of returned Riata products in Canada. METHODS The analyses of returned Riata products in Canada were obtained from St Jude Medical, Sylmar, CA. These data were correlated with the clinical presentation of patients just before lead removal from service. RESULTS As of May 1, 2013, there were 263 returned Riata leads in Canada. Of these, 43 (16.8%) were found to have insulation abrasion that was due to either lead-can or lead-other device interaction (70%) or inside-out abrasion (27.9%). The predilection of lead-to-can abrasion was seen in the Riata 7-F leads (84.2% vs 58.4%; P = .07), while inside-out abrasion was more common in the Riata 8-F leads (37.5% vs 15.8%; P = .12). Electrical abnormalities were frequent (20 of 31 [65.4%]) and most often due to electrical noise (45.2%), although inappropriate shocks were present (25.8%). Death occurred in 1 of 43 (2.3%) of those patients with an insulation defect in the lead-can abrasion group. CONCLUSION Lead-can abrasion is the most common form of insulation defect in the Riata group of leads under advisory. Management of this group of leads under advisory should not neglect the issue of lead-can abrasion, in addition to detection of cable externalization.