scholarly journals 073_16227-J2 Externalized Conductors-Can a Shock Now Predicts a Failure Later?

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (10) ◽  
pp. S18
Author(s):  
R. Corbisiero
Keyword(s):  
Externalized Conductors

scholarly journals Giant right atrial thrombus associated with ICD lead externalized conductors: a case report

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Benoît le Polain de Waroux ◽  
Christophe Scavée ◽  
Sébastien Marchandise
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Right Atrial ◽  
Atrial Thrombus ◽  
Right Atrial Thrombus ◽  
Externalized Conductors

scholarly journals 176-49: Incidence of New Externalized Conductors and Electrical Performance in Riata Leads: Results from a Multicenter Study

EP Europace ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. i129-i129
Author(s):  
David L. Hayes ◽  
Roger A. Freedman ◽  
Mark Niebauer ◽  
Vance Plumb ◽  
Jay Dinerman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multicenter Study ◽  
Electrical Performance ◽  
Externalized Conductors

Prevalence of externalized conductors in Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: Results from the prospective, multicenter Riata Lead Evaluation Study

Heart Rhythm ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1778-1782 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Hayes ◽  
Roger Freedman ◽  
Anne B. Curtis ◽  
Mark Niebauer ◽  
G. Neal Kay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Externalized Conductors

Fluoroscopic and Electrical Assessment of a Series of Defibrillation Leads: Prevalence of Externalized Conductors

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 1498-1504 ◽  
Author(s):  
VIVEK N. KODOTH ◽  
EMILY C. HODKINSON ◽  
REBECCA L. NOAD ◽  
KYLE P. ASHFIELD ◽  
NICHOLAS A. CROMIE ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Externalized Conductors ◽  
Defibrillation Leads

P2859Low rates of mechanical failures of silicone-polyurethane copolymer-coated ICD leads: 11 years prospective follow-up

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J A Cairns ◽  
K Balasubramanian ◽  
E Themeles ◽  
A E Epstein ◽  
J S Healey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nyha Class ◽  
Mechanical Failure ◽  
Lead Failure ◽  
Icd Leads ◽  
Insulation Coating ◽  
The Status ◽  
Lead Testing ◽  
Very High ◽  
Externalized Conductors

Abstract Background High rates of ICD lead mechanical failures (insulation abrasion and conductor fracture) resulted in FDA recalls and substantial design modifications. Most subsequent reports of lead failures of newer generation leads are based upon modest-sized, retrospective cohorts with relatively brief follow-up and may be unreliable. Following lead modifications (including silicone-polyurethane copolymer insulation coating), in 2007, one manufacturer established 3 prospective registries, and engaged a university-based methods center to independently review the registries, to adjudicate all reports of lead failures and to independently analyze lead survival. Up to 11 years of follow-up is now available. Purpose To adjudicate all reports of leads inactivated because of possible mechanical failure and to independently calculate rates of mechanical failure overall and by specific type. Methods Manufacturer expert staff confirm each lead inactivation by site interrogation. Following formal algorithms which incorporate lead testing and remote monitoring, they designate all-cause mechanical failure (fracture; insulation abrasion; failure at crimp, bond or weld; or uncertain) based upon the finding of electrical noise, very low or very high or rapidly rising impedance or alternatively they designate non-mechanical dysfunction (e.g. no impedance criteria but elevated thresholds, over or under sensing). The results of returned product analyses are incorporated when available (31%). The methods center receives electronic data transfers twice yearly, reviews all documentation, adjudicates all instances of possible lead failure, assigns probable cause (by 2 electrophysiologists) and conducts independent analyses of lead survival. Results 10,866 patients (73% male, mean age 65.9 yr., LVEF 29.3%, NYHA class II or III 89%) with 11,132 leads had follow-up of 4.6 yr. (median) and 11 yr. (maximum) (Aug 31, 2018). Lead follow-up was censored at the time of lead inactivation, death/transplant or administrative withdrawal. Of leads enrolled, there were 26.6% still in follow-up and of those not the status was 7.4% inactivated, 29.5% death or transplant, 33.8% administrative withdrawal and 3.7% reason missing. Following adjudication, there were 156 all-cause mechanical failures (1.40% total, 0.29%/yr.). Rates of cause-specific mechanical failures were: fracture 1.02% total, 0.22%/yr.; insulation abrasion 0.28% total, 0.06%/yr.; miscellaneous/uncertain 0.12% total, 0.02%/yr.; and externalized conductors 0%. Life-table rates of freedom from lead failure by 11 years were: all-cause mechanical failure 95.9%, conductor fracture 97.0%, insulation abrasion 99.1%, mechanical failure other/uncertain type 99.9%, and externalized conductors 100%. Conclusions Up to 11 yr prospective follow-up of silicone-polyurethane-coated ICD leads with independent adjudication and analyses of events shows low rates of all-cause mechanical failure and no externalized conductors. Acknowledgement/Funding Abbott

Failure of fluoroscopy to detect “inside-out” insulation failure and externalized conductors in a Riata ICD lead

Heart Rhythm ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1827-1828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edmond M. Cronin ◽  
Bryan J. Baranowski ◽  
David O. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Insulation Failure ◽  
Inside Out ◽  
Externalized Conductors

scholarly journals Prevalence and Presentation of Externalized Conductors and Electrical Abnormalities in Riata Defibrillator Leads After Fluoroscopic Screening

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 1059-1063 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic A.M.J. Theuns ◽  
Arif Elvan ◽  
Willem de Voogt ◽  
Carel C. de Cock ◽  
Lieselot van Erven ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Externalized Conductors
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document