Long-term right ventricular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead performance in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy

Background Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is a progressive disease characterized by replacement of normal myocardium by fibrofatty tissue. The right ventricular (RV) apex is the typical target for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead placement, raising concerns f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Heart rhythm 2016-10, Vol.13 (10), p.1964-1970
Hauptverfasser: Herman, Adam R.M., MSc, Gardner, Martin, MD, Steinberg, Christian, MD, Yeung-Lai-Wah, John A., MD, Healey, Jeff S., MD, Leong-Sit, Peter, MD, Krahn, Andrew D., MD, Chakrabarti, Santabhanu, MD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is a progressive disease characterized by replacement of normal myocardium by fibrofatty tissue. The right ventricular (RV) apex is the typical target for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead placement, raising concerns for suboptimal lead performance in medium- to long-term follow-up. Objective The purpose of this study was to determine whether placement of ICD leads at the RV apex was associated with performance deterioration of medium-term leads in ARVC patients compared to non-ARVC patients. Methods In this multicenter, retrospective, case-control study, ICD lead performance measures of R-wave, impedance, and pacing thresholds were compared at baseline and between 1-year and 5-year postimplantation follow-up using mixed-effect models adjusted for age and sex. Results One hundred one ARVC patients (49 women, age 50.6 ± 14.5 years) were compared to 56 control patients (37 women, age 48.2 ± 14.2 years). The mean difference in R wave between years 1 and 2 was –0.85 mV ( P = .16) compared to a mean difference at years 5 and 6 of –1.85 mV ( P = .02). There was no difference in impedance or pacing threshold or in lead lifetime between the 2 groups over 6-year follow-up (5.91 ± 3.89 years vs 5.48 ± 3.70 years, P = .239). Conclusion In ARVC patients with ICD leads implanted in the RV apex, ventricular sensing deteriorates significantly during medium-term follow-up. Septal RV lead placement should be explored as the first choice at implantation.
ISSN:1547-5271
1556-3871
DOI:10.1016/j.hrthm.2016.06.021