Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 23, 2026

A New Single Chamber Implantable Defibrillator with Atrial Sensing: A Practical Demonstration of Sensing and Ease of Implantation
Published on: February 28, 2012
Biventricular defibrillator patients have higher complication rates after revision of recalled leads
Genevieve E Brumberg1, Bahaa Kaseer, Hemal Shah
1University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Insights
Following updated advisories, Sprint Fidelis® defibrillator lead revisions increased. Biventricular ICD patients experienced higher complication rates, but lead extraction risk was comparable to abandonment.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Device Engineering
- Electrophysiology
Background:
- The 2009 advisory statement on Sprint Fidelis® Defibrillator Lead failure rates prompted increased lead revisions.
- Understanding procedural complications and associated patient factors is crucial.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the frequency of major procedural complications after Sprint Fidelis® lead revisions.
- To identify patient characteristics associated with these complications.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of 621 patients with Fidelis® leads at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.
- Analysis of lead malfunction, revision rates, and procedural complications.
Main Results:
- Prophylactic lead revisions significantly increased in 2009.
- 8.5% of patients undergoing revision experienced postoperative complications.
- Biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator (BiVICD) patients had higher complication rates (81.8% vs. 48.7%).
Conclusions:
- Prophylactic Fidelis® lead revisions and associated complications have risen.
- BiVICD patients face increased major procedural complication risks.
- Lead extraction risk is similar to lead abandonment.
Background:
Since the 2009 revised advisory statement regarding Sprint Fidelis® Defibrillator Lead failure rates (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA), there has been a significant increase in revision of these leads. We sought to establish the frequency of major procedural complications and determine what patient characteristics were associated with these outcomes.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 621 patients with Fidelis® leads being followed in the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center through January 1, 2010. The population was then examined for rates of lead malfunction, revision, and complication.
Results:
The average time from implantation of Fidelis® lead to endpoint was 32 ± 16 months. Overall lead survival rates were 89% at 41 months and were lower in biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator (BiVICD) as compared to standard implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients (log rank P = 0.053). Prophylactic revisions increased dramatically during 2009 (9.4% vs 1.4%, P < 0.001). Among the 131 patients who underwent revision during the entire time of follow-up, 11 patients had postoperative complications (8.5%). The only significant variable found between patients who did and did not have complications was the presence of a BiVICD (81.8 vs 48.7%, P = 0.036). Of the 40 total patients who underwent lead extraction, all three complications occurred in patients with BiVICDs.
Conclusion:
The number of prophylactic Fidelis® lead revisions has increased dramatically since 2008, and procedure-related complications have been higher than anticipated. Major procedural complication rates are greater among patients with BiVICDs. Overall, lead extraction does not appear to increase procedural risk as compared to abandonment.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Endocarditis III: Medical Management
Cardiac Catheterization IV: Nursing Management
Endocarditis IV: Nursing Management
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use
