TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of results with different left ventricular pacing leads
AU - Nof, Eyal
AU - Gurevitz, Osnat
AU - Carraso, Shemy
AU - Bar-Lev, David
AU - Luria, David
AU - Bachar, Sharona
AU - Eldar, Michael
AU - Glikson, Michael
PY - 2008/1
Y1 - 2008/1
N2 - Aims: To compare different coronary sinus (CS) leads and delivery systems (DSs) for left ventricular pacing. Methods and results: Delivery systems-related (including CS dissection and dislocations during sheath/stylet removal) and lead-related (including failure to accomplish implantations and long-term malfunctions resulting in abandonment or repositioning/replacing of the lead) complications between systems and leads were compared. We used Medtronic (MDT) attain® DS (n = 123) with over-the-wire (OTW) (4193, 4194) and stylet-driven (2187) leads, and Guidant (GDT)® DS (n = 126) with Easytrak OTW leads (4513, 4518, and 4525). Coronory sinus dissection occurred in 6/123 (5%) cases using the MDT DS vs. 7/126 (6%) with GDT DS (P= NS). Dislocations during sheath/stylet removal occurred in 8/123 cases (6%) with MDT DS, and in 8/126 (6%) with GDT DS (P= NS). Failure to achieve successful implantation occurred in 6/32 (19%) of the 2187 leads, in 11/87(13%) of the 4193/4194 leads, in 7/94(7%) of the 4513/4518 leads, and in 4/29 (14%) of the 4525 leads (P= NS). Long-term lead-related complications occurred in 5/32 (15%) of the 2187 leads, 19/80 (23%) of the 4193/4194 leads, 19/93 (20%) of the 4513/4518 leads, and 2/28 (7%) of the 4525 leads (P= NS). Conclusion: No significant differences in complication rates between systems and leads were observed. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AB - Aims: To compare different coronary sinus (CS) leads and delivery systems (DSs) for left ventricular pacing. Methods and results: Delivery systems-related (including CS dissection and dislocations during sheath/stylet removal) and lead-related (including failure to accomplish implantations and long-term malfunctions resulting in abandonment or repositioning/replacing of the lead) complications between systems and leads were compared. We used Medtronic (MDT) attain® DS (n = 123) with over-the-wire (OTW) (4193, 4194) and stylet-driven (2187) leads, and Guidant (GDT)® DS (n = 126) with Easytrak OTW leads (4513, 4518, and 4525). Coronory sinus dissection occurred in 6/123 (5%) cases using the MDT DS vs. 7/126 (6%) with GDT DS (P= NS). Dislocations during sheath/stylet removal occurred in 8/123 cases (6%) with MDT DS, and in 8/126 (6%) with GDT DS (P= NS). Failure to achieve successful implantation occurred in 6/32 (19%) of the 2187 leads, in 11/87(13%) of the 4193/4194 leads, in 7/94(7%) of the 4513/4518 leads, and in 4/29 (14%) of the 4525 leads (P= NS). Long-term lead-related complications occurred in 5/32 (15%) of the 2187 leads, 19/80 (23%) of the 4193/4194 leads, 19/93 (20%) of the 4513/4518 leads, and 2/28 (7%) of the 4525 leads (P= NS). Conclusion: No significant differences in complication rates between systems and leads were observed. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
KW - Cardiac resynchronization therapy
KW - Delivery systems
KW - Left ventricular leads
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=40349108813&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/europace/eum241
DO - 10.1093/europace/eum241
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:40349108813
SN - 1099-5129
VL - 10
SP - 35
EP - 39
JO - Europace
JF - Europace
IS - 1
ER -