The learning curve associated with the implantation of the Nanostim leadless pacemaker

Purpose Use of novel medical technologies, such as leadless pacemaker (LP) therapy, may be subjected to a learning curve effect. The objective of the current study was to assess the impact of operators’ experience on the occurrence of serious adverse device effects (SADE) and procedural efficiency....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology 2018-11, Vol.53 (2), p.239-247
Hauptverfasser: Tjong, Fleur V.Y., Beurskens, Niek E.G., Neuzil, Petr, Defaye, Pascal, Delnoy, Peter-Paul, Ip, John, Guerrero, Juan Jose Garcia, Rashtian, Mayer, Banker, Rajesh, Reddy, Vivek, Exner, Derek, Sperzel, Johannes, Knops, Reinoud E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose Use of novel medical technologies, such as leadless pacemaker (LP) therapy, may be subjected to a learning curve effect. The objective of the current study was to assess the impact of operators’ experience on the occurrence of serious adverse device effects (SADE) and procedural efficiency. Methods Patients implanted with a Nanostim LP (Abbott, USA) within two prospective studies (i.e., LEADLESS ll IDE and Leadless Observational Study) were assessed. Patients were categorized into quartiles based on operator experience. Learning curve analysis included the comparison of SADE rates at 30 days post-implant per quartile and between patients in quartile 4 (> 10 implants) and patients in quartiles 1 through 3 (1–10 implants). Procedural efficiency was assessed based on procedure duration and repositioning attempts. Results Nanostim LP implant was performed in 1439 patients by 171 implanters at 60 centers in 10 countries. A total of 91 (6.4%) patients experienced a SADE in the first 30 days. SADE rates dropped from 7.4 to 4.5% ( p  = 0.038) after more than 10 implants per operator. Total procedure duration decreased from 30.9 ± 19.1 min in quartile 1 to 21.6 ± 13.2 min ( p  
ISSN:1383-875X
1572-8595
DOI:10.1007/s10840-018-0438-8