Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 5, 2026

A New Single Chamber Implantable Defibrillator with Atrial Sensing: A Practical Demonstration of Sensing and Ease of Implantation
Published on: February 28, 2012
Complication rates associated with pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacements and
Jeanne E Poole1, Marye J Gleva, Theofanie Mela
1University of Washington, Division of Cardiology, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Seattle, WA 98198-6422, USA. jpoole@u.washington.edu
Insights
Pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacement surgeries carry significant risks, especially when lead additions are involved. Careful consideration is crucial before proceeding with these device procedures.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Devices
- Surgical Risk Assessment
Background:
- Limited prospective data exists on the risks of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator replacement surgeries.
- These procedures are often perceived as low-risk, contrasting with recent retrospective findings of higher complication rates.
Purpose of the Study:
- To prospectively evaluate complication rates associated with elective pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacements.
- To compare risks between device replacements without and with transvenous lead additions.
Main Methods:
- A prospective study involving 72 US centers assessed complication rates over 6 months.
- Two cohorts were studied: Cohort 1 (generator replacement only) and Cohort 2 (generator replacement with lead addition/upgrade).
- Complications were adjudicated by an independent committee.
Main Results:
- Major complications occurred in 4.0% of Cohort 1 and 15.3% of Cohort 2 patients.
- Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator replacements had higher major complication rates than pacemaker replacements in both cohorts.
- Upgrades to cardiac resynchronization therapy devices showed the highest complication rate (18.7%); 8 late deaths occurred in Cohort 2.
Conclusions:
- Pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacements carry a notable risk, particularly when lead additions are performed.
- Findings underscore the need for careful decision-making before device replacement, managing advisories, and considering complex system upgrades.
Background:
Prospective studies defining the risk associated with pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator replacement surgeries do not exist. These procedures are generally considered low risk despite results from recent retrospective series reporting higher rates.
Methods And Results:
We prospectively assessed predefined procedure-related complication rates associated with elective pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacements over 6 months of follow-up. Two groups were studied: those without (cohort 1) and those with (cohort 2) a planned transvenous lead addition for replacement or upgrade to a device capable of additional therapies. Complications were adjudicated by an independent events committee. Seventy-two US academic and private practice centers participated. Major complications occurred in 4.0% (95% confidence interval, 2.9 to 5.4) of 1031 cohort 1 patients and 15.3% (95% confidence interval, 12.7 to 18.1) of 713 cohort 2 patients. In both cohorts, major complications were higher with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator compared with pacemaker generator replacements. Complications were highest in patients who had an upgrade to or a revised cardiac resynchronization therapy device (18.7%; 95% confidence interval, 15.1 to 22.6). No periprocedural deaths occurred in either cohort, although 8 later procedure-related deaths occurred in cohort 2. The 6-month infection rates were 1.4% (95% confidence interval, 0.7 to 2.3) and 1.1% (95% confidence interval, 0.5 to 2.2) for cohorts 1 and 2, respectively.
Conclusions:
Pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacements are associated with a notable complication risk, particularly those with lead additions. These data support careful decision making before device replacement, when managing device advisories, and when considering upgrades to more complex systems.
More Related Videos
12:45Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
06:10Utilizing Percutaneous Ventricular Assist Devices in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
Published on: June 12, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Pulse rhythm
Conversely, an irregular pulse pattern is termed dysrhythmia, stemming from disruptions in cardiac...
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy III: Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care