ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2018
Risk Factors and Temporal Trends of Complications Associated With Transvenous Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator Leads.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Subcutaneous Versus Transvenous Implantable Defibrillator Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials and Propensity Score-Matched Studies.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Pooled it
- Palliative care in pulmonary hypertension associated with congenital heart disease: systematic review and expert opinion.ESC heart failure · 2021Pooled it
- Device-Related Complications in Transvenous Versus Subcutaneous Defibrillator Therapy During Long-Term Follow-Up: The PRAETORIAN-XL Trial.Circulation · 2025Trial
- Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial.European heart journal · 2022Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of leadless versus transvenous single-chamber ventricular pacing: a propensity-weighted real-world study in France.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Influencing Factors and Prediction of Complications After Implantation of Cardiac Electronic Devices.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2026Article
- Innovations in cardiac device therapy in the era of advanced rhythm management: implantable defibrillators and conduction system pacing.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2026Review
- Extravascular implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead fracture and challenges with revision.HeartRhythm case reports · 2026Article
- Time to rethink transvenous systems in younger patients?Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Preservation of an extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator during sternotomy and surgical myectomy.HeartRhythm case reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative Analysis of Two-Lead DX-Based CRT Versus Conventional Three-Lead CRT-D: Results from a Single-Center Prospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Echocardiographic Predictors of Ventricular Arrhythmias Post-Automatic Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- [Subcutaneous defibrillator (S-ICD)].Herz · 2025Article
- [Modular heart rhythm management : EMPOWER™ leadless pacemaker as an add-on to the EMBLEM™ S-ICD].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2025Article
- Retained Lead Fragments in Superior Vena Cava and Early Post-Transplant Outcomes: A Single Center Preliminary Retrospective Study.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Implantable Defibrillators: Which Is the Best Device for Each Patient?Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2025Review
- Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation in the Presence of Substernal Extravascular Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- [Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients with left ventricular assist devices : Current controversies].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2025Review
- Comparison of Single- vs. Dual-Lead CIEDs Regarding Perioperative Complications-Analysis of the Quality Assurance Data of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead is the most common source of complications in a traditional ICD system. This investigation aims to determine the incidence, predictors, and costs associated with these complications using a large insurance database. METHODS AND
resultsData from the OptumLabs™ Data Warehouse, which include diagnosis, physician and procedure codes, and claims from patient hospitalizations, were analyzed. Patients with a de novo ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator implanted from January 1, 2003, through June 30, 2015, were included; those who did not have continuous coverage beginning 1 year before implantation were excluded, resulting in 40 837 patients followed up over an average of 2.3±2.1 years. Patients were followed up until they had the procedure or their last active date in the database. Of 20 580 device procedures, 2165 (5.3%) and 771 (1.9%) had mechanical and infectious complications, respectively. The 5-year rate of freedom from mechanical complication was 92.0% and 89.3% for ICDs and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators, respectively. Infectious complications were more likely in patients with a history of atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus, and renal disease, and the risk increased with subsequent device procedures. Younger age, female sex, lack of comorbidities, and implantations between 2003 and 2008 were associated with more mechanical complications.
conclusionsIncidence of mechanical and infectious complications of transvenous ICD leads over long-term follow-up is much higher in the real world than in clinical studies. In our study cohort, 1 of 4 transvenous ICD leads had mechanical complications when followed up to 10 years. The high rate of reintervention leads to additional complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.