Related Experiment Videos
Pacing lead survival: performance of different models
J R Woscoboinik1, J D Maloney, M E Helguera
1Department of Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Ohio 44195.
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology : PACE
|November 1, 1992
Summary
The Medtronic 4012 ventricular lead showed significantly poorer survival compared to others. Atrial leads performed consistently, but pacemaker-dependent patients require frequent lead monitoring.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Biomedical Engineering
- Medical Device Analysis
Background:
- Pacemaker lead survival is critical for patient outcomes.
- Previous reports indicate variability in lead longevity.
- Understanding lead performance is essential for clinical practice.
Purpose of the Study:
- To perform a long-term survival analysis of implanted pacemaker leads.
- To compare the survival rates of different lead models.
- To identify leads with suboptimal performance.
Main Methods:
- Survival analysis of 2,444 atrial and ventricular leads implanted since 1980.
- Comparison of individual lead model survival against the average for their respective chambers.
- Failure defined as lead inactivation due to fracture.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in survival was observed among atrial lead models.
- The Medtronic 4012 ventricular lead demonstrated statistically significant poorer survival (P=0.01).
- The Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc. (CPI) 4010 ventricular lead showed a trend towards worse performance.
Conclusions:
- The Medtronic 4012 lead exhibits significantly poorer performance.
- Atrial lead survival rates were stable across models.
- Close patient follow-up is crucial, particularly for pacemaker-dependent individuals.