ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2025
Battery Longevity in Modern Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy-Defibrillators.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Battery Longevity in Modern Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators and Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy-Defibrillators.Journal of arrhythmia · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Battery longevity in high-voltage devices (HVDs), specifically implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillators (CRT-Ds), is critical for reducing the frequency of generator replacements, minimizing procedural risks, and enhancing patient outcomes. Despite technological advancements, significant variability in battery performance remains among the major manufacturers. This study aimed to evaluate the battery longevity among ICDs and CRT-Ds from the major manufacturers implanted at a single institution and identify the factors influencing battery depletion. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 353 patients implanted with HVDs (63 Abbott, 150 Boston Scientific, 140 Medtronic) at Hokkaido University Hospital between 2012 and 2021. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze the device longevity, with a primary endpoint of the time to battery depletion, defined by the elective replacement indicator. A multivariate analysis adjusted for the potential confounders. Results: Boston Scientific devices exhibited a significantly longer battery life than Abbott and Medtronic devices ( Conclusion: Battery longevity differed significantly by the manufacturer, which may influence device selection. Devices with a longer battery life may help reduce the replacement frequency and could potentially contribute to improved patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
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.