Rationale and design of the Lead Evaluation for Defibrillation and Reliability study: Safety and efficacy of a novel ICD lead design.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are indicated for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac arrest. Despite enhancements in design and technologies, the ICD lead is the most vulnerable component of the ICD system and failure of ICD leads remains a significant clinical problem. A novel, small-diameter, lumenless, catheter-delivered, defibrillator lead was developed with the aim to improve long-term reliability. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Lead Evaluation for Defibrillation and Reliability (LEADR) study is a multi-center, single-arm, Bayesian, adaptive design, pre-market interventional pivotal clinical study. Up to 60 study sites from around the world will participate in the study. Patients indicated for a de novo ICD will undergo defibrillation testing at implantation and clinical assessments at baseline, implant, pre-hospital discharge, 3 months, 6 months, and every 6 months thereafter until official study closure. Patients may be participating for a minimum of 18 months to approximately 3 years. Fracture-free survival will be evaluated using a Bayesian statistical method that incorporates both virtual patient data (combination of bench testing to failure with in-vivo use condition data) with clinical patients. The clinical subject sample size will be determined using decision rules for number of subject enrollments and follow-up time based upon the observed number of fractures at certain time points in the study. The adaptive study design will therefore result in a minimum of 500 and a maximum of 900 patients enrolled. CONCLUSION: The LEADR Clinical Study was designed to efficiently provide evidence for short- and long-term safety and efficacy of a novel lead design using Bayesian methods including a novel virtual patient approach.

Performance of first pacemaker to use smart device app for remote monitoring.

BACKGROUND: High adherence to remote monitoring (RM) in pacemaker (PM) patients improves outcomes; however, adherence remains suboptimal. Bluetooth low-energy (BLE) technology in newer-generation PMs enables communication directly with patient-owned smart devices using an app without a bedside console. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the success rate of scheduled RM transmissions using the app compared to other RM methods. METHODS: The BlueSync Field Evaluation was a prospective, international cohort evaluation, measuring the success rate of scheduled RM transmissions using a BLE PM or cardiac resynchronization therapy PM coupled with the MyCareLink Heart app. App transmission success was compared to 3 historical "control" groups from the Medtronic de-identified CareLink database: (1) PM patients with manual communication using a wand with a bedside console (PM manual transmission), (2) PM patients with wireless automatic communication with the bedside console (PM wireless); (3) defibrillator patients with similar automatic communication (defibrillator wireless). RESULTS: Among 245 patients enrolled (age 64.8±15.6 years, 58.4% men), 953 transmissions were scheduled through 12 months, of which 902 (94.6%) were successfully completed. In comparison, transmission success rates were 56.3% for PM manual transmission patients, 77.0% for PM wireless patients, and 87.1% for defibrillator wireless patients. Transmission success with the app was superior across matched cohorts based on age, sex, and device type (single vs dual vs triple chamber). CONCLUSION: The success rate of scheduled RM transmissions was higher among patients using the smart device app compared to patients using traditional RM using bedside consoles. This novel technology may improve patient engagement and adherence to RM.

Performance of a novel left ventricular lead with short bipolar spacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy: primary results of the Attain Performa quadripolar left ventricular lead study.

BACKGROUND: The Medtronic Attain Performa quadripolar leads provide 16 pacing vectors with steroid on every electrode. This includes a short bipolar configuration between the middle 2 electrodes. OBJECTIVE: A prospective clinical study was conducted to investigate the safety and effectiveness of these new leads in 27 countries. METHODS: Cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator candidates were enrolled (mean age 68 years; 71% men). All implanted subjects were followed at 1, 3, and 6 months postimplant. Pacing capture threshold (PCT) values were measured at each visit. Adverse events were reported upon occurrence. RESULTS: Of 1124 subjects in whom a left ventricular (LV) lead was attempted, 1097 (97.6%) were successfully implanted with an Attain Performa lead. Thirty-six LV lead-related complications were reported (the 6-month LV lead-related complication-free survival rate was 96.9%). Phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) occurred in 81 subjects (7.2%), with only 3 (0.3%) requiring surgical intervention. At 6 months, the mean PCT at the programmed vector was (1.1 ± 0.8) V and 94.4% of subjects had a PCT of ≤2.5 V. All 16 programming polarities were used in at least 1 patient, and short bipolar configurations were used in 17% of subjects. CONCLUSION: This large multicenter study demonstrated a high success rate for the implantation of Attain Performa quadripolar LV leads with a low complication rate. The PCT was low and stable over time. A low rate of postimplantation PNS was observed, and cases of PNS were readily resolved with reprogramming. Nonstandard vectors were often used for LV pacing.

Strategic programming of detection and therapy parameters in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators reduces shocks in primary prevention patients: results from the PREPARE (Primary Prevention Parameters Evaluation) study.

OBJECTIVES: Our purpose was to demonstrate that strategically chosen implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) detection and therapy parameters can reduce the combined incidence of device-delivered shocks, arrhythmic syncope, and untreated sustained symptomatic VT/VF (morbidity index). BACKGROUND: Strategically chosen ICD VT/VF detection and therapy parameters have been shown in previous studies to reduce the number of shocked episodes. In the PREPARE (Primary Prevention Parameters Evaluation) study, these prior strategies were combined with additional strategies specific to primary prevention patients. METHODS: The PREPARE study was a prospective, cohort-controlled study that analyzed 700 patients (biventricular [Bi-V] ICD and non-Bi-V ICD) with primary prevention indications for an ICD from 38 centers followed for 1 year. VT/VF was detected for rates > or =182 beats/min that were maintained for at least 30 of 40 beats. Antitachycardia pacing was programmed as the first therapy for regular rhythms with rates of 182 to 250 beats/min, and supraventricular tachycardia discriminators were used for rhythms < or =200 beats/min. The control cohort consisted of 689 primary prevention patients from the EMPIRIC (Comparison of Empiric to Physician-Tailored Programming of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators Trial) (non-Bi-V ICD, physician arm only) and MIRACLE ICD (Multicenter InSync Implantable Cardioversion Defibrillation Randomized Clinical Evaluation) (Bi-V ICD) trials for whom VT/VF detection and therapy programming were not controlled. RESULTS: The PREPARE programming significantly reduced the morbidity index incidence density (0.26 events/patient-year for PREPARE study patients vs. 0.69 control cohort, p = 0.003). The PREPARE study patients were less likely to receive a shock in the first year compared with control patients (9% vs. 17%, p < 0.01). The incidence of untreated VT and arrhythmic syncope was similar between the PREPARE study patients and the control cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Strategically chosen VT/VF detection and therapy parameters can safely reduce shocks and other morbidities associated with ICD therapy in patients receiving an ICD for primary prevention indications. (PREPARE-Primary Prevention Parameters Evaluation; NCT00279279).

Design of the Primary Prevention Parameters Evaluation (PREPARE) trial of implantable cardioverter defibrillators to reduce patient morbidity [NCT00279279].

BACKGROUND: Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) therapy has been proven to be beneficial and efficacious for the treatment of serious ventricular tachyarrhythmias in primary prevention patients. However, primary prevention patients appear to have a lower incidence of ventricular arrhythmias in comparison to secondary prevention patients and consequently likely experience a higher proportion of detections due to supraventricular arrhythmias. Recent trials have demonstrated that strategic and specific programming choices reduce the number of inappropriate shocks and that anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) is an effective alternative to shock therapy for many sustained ventricular arrhythmias. METHODS: The Primary Prevention Parameters Evaluation (PREPARE) study is a multi-center cohort study, evaluating the efficacy of a pre-specified strategic profile of VT/VF detection and therapy settings in 700 primary prevention patients in an effort to safely reduce the number of shock therapies delivered. The patients, both with and without cardiac resynchronization therapy, are compared to a well-qualified set (n = 691) of historical controls derived from the MIRACLE ICD and EMPIRIC trials. This manuscript describes the design of the PREPARE study. The study results, to be presented separately, will characterize the efficacy of this programming set (PREPARE) compared with physician-tailored programming (MIRACLE ICD and EMPIRIC).

Detection and management of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead failure: incidence and clinical implications.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the long-term reliability of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) lead to determine the incidence, clinical presentation, and management of lead failure. BACKGROUND: Despite recent advances in ICD technology, the long-term reliability of ICD leads remains a significant problem. METHODS: Concern about long-term reliability of coaxial polyurethane ICD leads caused us to systematically study all patients implanted with Medtronic (Minneapolis, Minnesota) 6936 lead at our institution. We performed follow-up of 74 patients with 76 ICD leads that were implanted from February 28, 1995 to September 8, 1997. Thirty-seven patients underwent routine clinical ICD follow-up testing and ventricular fibrillation induction to determine the status of their ICD lead after a mean follow-up of 68.6 +/- 8.2 months. RESULTS: The lead survival analysis shows a cumulative failure probability of 37% (confidence interval, 24% to 54%) at 68.6 months. Six patients demonstrated a previously undescribed mode of ICD lead failure: prolonged oversensing immediately after shock therapy. The use of short interval counters to monitor nonphysiologic R-R intervals and the measurement of ring-to-coil impedance detected early lead failures in five patients. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows: 1) problems with ICD leads may not become apparent until late during follow-up and may become a significant late problem, 2) a "signature" mode of lead failure for the 6936 consisting of oversensing of electrical noise following shocks, 3) early detection of lead failure with a short interval counter algorithm or measurement of ring-to-coil impedance may be clinically useful.