Journal article
Longevity of implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a comparison among manufacturers and over time.
- von Gunten S Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
- Schaer BA Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland bschaer@uhbs.ch.
- Yap SC Department of Cardiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Szili-Torok T Department of Cardiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Kühne M Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
- Sticherling C Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
- Osswald S Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
- Theuns DA Department of Cardiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- 2015-11-27
Published in:
- Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology. - 2016
Cardiac resynchronization therapy
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
Longevity
Survival
Aged
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Defibrillators, Implantable
Device Removal
Electric Power Supplies
Equipment Design
Equipment Failure
Equipment Failure Analysis
Female
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Male
Middle Aged
Netherlands
Switzerland
Time Factors
English
AIMS
Longevity of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) is crucial for patients and healthcare systems as replacements impact on infection rates and cost-effectiveness. Aim was to determine longevity using very large databases of two teaching hospitals with a high number of replacements and a rather homogeneous distribution among manufacturers.
METHODS AND RESULTS
The study population consists of all patients in whom an ICD was inserted in. All ICD manufacturers operating in Switzerland and the Netherlands and all implanted ICDs were included. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator replacements due to normal battery depletion were considered events, and other replacements were censored. Longevity was assessed depending on manufacturers, pacing mode, implant before/after 2006, and all parameters combined. We analysed data from 3436 patients in whom 4881 ICDs [44.2% VVI-ICDs, 27.4% DDD-ICDs, 26.3% cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)-ICDs, 2.0% subcutaneous ICDs] were implanted. The four major manufacturers had implant shares between 18.4 and 31.5%. Replacement due to battery depletion (27.4%) was performed for 1339 ICDs. Patient survival at 5 years was 80.1%. Longevity at 5 years improved in contemporary compared with elderly ICDs [63.9-80.6% across all ICDs, of 73.7-92.1% in VVIs, 58.2-76.1% in DDDs, and of 47.1-66.3% in CRT defibrillators, all P value < 0.05]. Remarkable differences were seen among manufacturers, and those with better performance in elderly ICDs were not those with better performance in contemporary ones.
CONCLUSION
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator longevity increased in contemporary models independent of manufacturer and pacing mode. Still, significant differences exist among manufacturers. These results might impact on device selection.
Longevity of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) is crucial for patients and healthcare systems as replacements impact on infection rates and cost-effectiveness. Aim was to determine longevity using very large databases of two teaching hospitals with a high number of replacements and a rather homogeneous distribution among manufacturers.
METHODS AND RESULTS
The study population consists of all patients in whom an ICD was inserted in. All ICD manufacturers operating in Switzerland and the Netherlands and all implanted ICDs were included. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator replacements due to normal battery depletion were considered events, and other replacements were censored. Longevity was assessed depending on manufacturers, pacing mode, implant before/after 2006, and all parameters combined. We analysed data from 3436 patients in whom 4881 ICDs [44.2% VVI-ICDs, 27.4% DDD-ICDs, 26.3% cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)-ICDs, 2.0% subcutaneous ICDs] were implanted. The four major manufacturers had implant shares between 18.4 and 31.5%. Replacement due to battery depletion (27.4%) was performed for 1339 ICDs. Patient survival at 5 years was 80.1%. Longevity at 5 years improved in contemporary compared with elderly ICDs [63.9-80.6% across all ICDs, of 73.7-92.1% in VVIs, 58.2-76.1% in DDDs, and of 47.1-66.3% in CRT defibrillators, all P value < 0.05]. Remarkable differences were seen among manufacturers, and those with better performance in elderly ICDs were not those with better performance in contemporary ones.
CONCLUSION
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator longevity increased in contemporary models independent of manufacturer and pacing mode. Still, significant differences exist among manufacturers. These results might impact on device selection.
- Language
-
- English
- Open access status
- closed
- Identifiers
-
- DOI 10.1093/europace/euv296
- PMID 26609076
- Persistent URL
- https://sonar.ch/global/documents/90588
Statistics
Document views: 15
File downloads: