TY - JOUR
T1 - Effectiveness of single- vs dual-coil implantable defibrillator leads
T2 - An observational analysis from the SIMPLE study
AU - Neuzner, Jörg
AU - Hohnloser, Stefan H.
AU - Kutyifa, Valentina
AU - Glikson, Michael
AU - Dietze, Thomas
AU - Mabo, Philippe
AU - Vinolas, Xavier
AU - Kautzner, Josef
AU - O'Hara, Gilles
AU - Lawo, Thomas
AU - Brachmann, Johannes
AU - VanErven, Liselot
AU - Gadler, Fredrik
AU - Appl, Ursula
AU - Wang, Jia
AU - Connolly, Stuart J.
AU - Healey, Jeff S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
PY - 2019/7
Y1 - 2019/7
N2 - Introduction: Dual-coil leads (DC-leads) were the standard of choice since the first nonthoracotomy implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD). We used contemporary data to determine if DC-leads offer any advantage over single-coil leads (SC-leads), in terms of defibrillation efficacy, safety, clinical outcome, and complication rates. Methods and Results: In the Shockless IMPLant Evaluation study, 2500 patients received a first implanted ICD and were randomized to implantation with or without defibrillation testing. Two thousand and four hundred seventy-five patients received SC-coil or DC-coil leads (SC-leads in 1025/2475 patients; 41.4%). In patients who underwent defibrillation testing (n = 1204), patients with both lead types were equally likely to achieve an adequate defibrillation safety margin (88.8% vs 91.2%; P = 0.16). There was no overall effect of lead type on the primary study endpoint of “failed appropriate shock or arrhythmic death” (adjusted HR 1.18; 95% CI, 0.86-1.62; P = 0.300), and on all-cause mortality (SC-leads: 5.34%/year; DC-leads: 5.48%/year; adjusted HR 1.16; 95% CI, 0.94-1.43; P = 0.168). However, among patients without prior heart failure (HF), and SC-leads had a significantly higher risk of failed appropriate shock or arrhythmic death (adjusted HR 7.02; 95% CI, 2.41-20.5). There were no differences in complication rates. Conclusion: In this nonrandomized evaluation, there was no overall difference in defibrillation efficacy, safety, outcome, and complication rates between SC-leads and DC-leads. However, DC-leads were associated with a reduction in the composite of failed appropriate shock or arrhythmic death in the subgroup of non-HF patients. Considering riskier future lead extraction with DC-leads, SC-leads appears to be preferable in the majority of patients.
AB - Introduction: Dual-coil leads (DC-leads) were the standard of choice since the first nonthoracotomy implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD). We used contemporary data to determine if DC-leads offer any advantage over single-coil leads (SC-leads), in terms of defibrillation efficacy, safety, clinical outcome, and complication rates. Methods and Results: In the Shockless IMPLant Evaluation study, 2500 patients received a first implanted ICD and were randomized to implantation with or without defibrillation testing. Two thousand and four hundred seventy-five patients received SC-coil or DC-coil leads (SC-leads in 1025/2475 patients; 41.4%). In patients who underwent defibrillation testing (n = 1204), patients with both lead types were equally likely to achieve an adequate defibrillation safety margin (88.8% vs 91.2%; P = 0.16). There was no overall effect of lead type on the primary study endpoint of “failed appropriate shock or arrhythmic death” (adjusted HR 1.18; 95% CI, 0.86-1.62; P = 0.300), and on all-cause mortality (SC-leads: 5.34%/year; DC-leads: 5.48%/year; adjusted HR 1.16; 95% CI, 0.94-1.43; P = 0.168). However, among patients without prior heart failure (HF), and SC-leads had a significantly higher risk of failed appropriate shock or arrhythmic death (adjusted HR 7.02; 95% CI, 2.41-20.5). There were no differences in complication rates. Conclusion: In this nonrandomized evaluation, there was no overall difference in defibrillation efficacy, safety, outcome, and complication rates between SC-leads and DC-leads. However, DC-leads were associated with a reduction in the composite of failed appropriate shock or arrhythmic death in the subgroup of non-HF patients. Considering riskier future lead extraction with DC-leads, SC-leads appears to be preferable in the majority of patients.
KW - all-cause mortality
KW - arrhythmic death
KW - defibrillation shock efficacy
KW - failed appropriate shocks
KW - implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
KW - intraoperative defibrillation testing
KW - single-coil and dual-coil leads
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064686777&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jce.13943
DO - 10.1111/jce.13943
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:85064686777
VL - 30
SP - 1078
EP - 1085
JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
SN - 1045-3873
IS - 7
ER -