Lead choice in cardiac implantable electronic devices: an Italian survey promoted by AIAC (Italian Association of Arrhythmias and Cardiac Pacing)

ABSTRACT Background: Few data are available regarding lead preferences of electrophysiologists during cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implantation. Aim of this survey is to evaluate the leads used, and the reasons behind these choices, in a large population of implanters. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to all 314 Italian centers with experience in CIED implantation. Results: 103 operators from 100 centers (32% of centers) responded. For atrium, passive leads represented first choice for pacemakers and defibrillators (71% and 64% of physicians, respectively), mainly for safety. For right ventricle, active fixation was preferred (61% and 93% operators in pacemaker and defibrillator patients), for higher versatility in positioning and lower dislodgement risk. For left ventricular stimulation, quadripolar leads were preferred by more than 80% of respondents, for better phrenic nerve and myocardial threshold management; active-fixation leads represent a second choice, in order to prevent or manage dislodgement (78% and 17% of respondents, respectively), but 44% of operators considered them dangerous. Conclusions: The choice of leads is heterogeneous. Trends are toward active-fixation right ventricular leads and passive-fixation atrial leads (particularly in pacemaker patients, considered frailer). For left ventricular stimulation, operators’ majority want to disposition all kind of leads, although quadripolar leads are the favorites.

[1]  C. Leclercq,et al.  Cardiac resynchronization therapy non-responder to responder conversion rate in the more response to cardiac resynchronization therapy with MultiPoint Pacing (MORE-CRT MPP) study: results from Phase I. , 2019, European heart journal.

[2]  C. Leclercq,et al.  Rationale and design of a randomized clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of multipoint pacing therapy: MOre REsponse on Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy with MultiPoint Pacing (MORE‐CRT MPP–PHASE II) , 2019, American heart journal.

[3]  G. Boriani,et al.  [The Pacemaker and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Registry of the Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing - Annual report 2017]. , 2019, Giornale italiano di cardiologia.

[4]  G. Boriani,et al.  Cardiac resynchronization therapy: a comparison among left ventricular bipolar, quadripolar and active fixation leads , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[5]  I. Nault,et al.  Clinical performance of different DF‐4 implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads , 2018, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[6]  M. Leening,et al.  Trends in replacement of pacemaker leads in the Netherlands: A long‐term nationwide follow‐up study , 2018, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[7]  G. Boriani,et al.  Cardiac resynchronization therapy: How did consensus guidelines from Europe and the United States evolve in the last 15 years? , 2018, International journal of cardiology.

[8]  G. Boriani,et al.  Clinically oriented device programming in bradycardia patients: part 2 (atrioventricular blocks and neurally mediated syncope). Proposals from AIAC (Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing) , 2018, Journal of cardiovascular medicine.

[9]  G. Boriani,et al.  Clinically oriented device programming in bradycardia patients: part 1 (sinus node disease). Proposals from AIAC (Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing) , 2018, Journal of cardiovascular medicine.

[10]  Paramdeep S. Dhillon,et al.  Outcomes with single-coil versus dual-coil implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a meta-analysis , 2018, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[11]  J. Baker,et al.  Safety and Efficacy of Multipoint Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: The MultiPoint Pacing Trial. , 2017, JACC. Clinical electrophysiology.

[12]  F. Leyva,et al.  Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Using Quadripolar Versus Non‐Quadripolar Left Ventricular Leads Programmed to Biventricular Pacing With Single‐Site Left Ventricular Pacing: Impact on Survival and Heart Failure Hospitalization , 2017, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[13]  L. Di Biase,et al.  Multipoint pacing via a quadripolar left-ventricular lead: preliminary results from the Italian registry on multipoint left-ventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy (IRON-MPP) , 2016, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[14]  Ó. Cano,et al.  Incidence and predictors of clinically relevant cardiac perforation associated with systematic implantation of active-fixation pacing and defibrillation leads: a single-centre experience with over 3800 implanted leads , 2016, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[15]  Nigel Gupta,et al.  Performance of Anatomically Designed Quadripolar Left Ventricular Leads: Results from the NAVIGATE X4 Clinical Trial , 2016, Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology.

[16]  Chance M. Witt,et al.  Right atrial lead fixation type and lead position are associated with significant variation in complications , 2016, Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology.

[17]  Svein Færestrand,et al.  Active fixation of a thin transvenous left-ventricular lead by a side helix facilitates targeted and stable placement in cardiac resynchronization therapy. , 2016, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[18]  F. Prinzen,et al.  Optimization of left ventricular pacing site plus multipoint pacing improves remodeling and clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy at 1 year. , 2016, Heart rhythm.

[19]  David O. Martin,et al.  Extraction of chronically implanted coronary sinus leads active fixation vs passive fixation leads. , 2016, Heart rhythm.

[20]  G. Boriani,et al.  Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With a Quadripolar Electrode Lead Decreases Complications at 6 Months: Results of the MORE-CRT Randomized Trial. , 2016, JACC. Clinical electrophysiology.

[21]  A. Curnis,et al.  The novel active fixation coronary sinus lead: efficacy and safety of transvenous extraction procedure. , 2016, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[22]  Andrea Mazzanti,et al.  2015 ESC Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Ventricular Arrhythmias and the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death. , 2016, Revista espanola de cardiologia.

[23]  G. Boriani,et al.  New left ventricular active fixation lead: The experience of lead extraction , 2015, Indian heart journal.

[24]  M. Biffi,et al.  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. , 2015, Heart rhythm.

[25]  Shulin Wu,et al.  A long-term, prospective, cohort study on the performance of right ventricular pacing leads: comparison of active-fixation with passive-fixation leads , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[26]  D. Corrado,et al.  Incidence, Management, and Prevention of Right Ventricular Perforation by Pacemaker and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Leads , 2014, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[27]  A. Proclemer,et al.  [The pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator registry of the Italian Association Arrhythmology Cardiac Pacing and cardiac pacing - annual report 2013]. , 2014, Giornale italiano di cardiologia.

[28]  J. Nielsen,et al.  ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy , 2014 .

[29]  A. Proclemer,et al.  Preferred tools and techniques for implantation of cardiac electronic devices in Europe: results of the European Heart Rhythm Association survey. , 2013, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[30]  M. Bongiorni,et al.  Learning while extracting: ‘pacing’ lessons from the world of lead extraction , 2013, Expert review of cardiovascular therapy.

[31]  Lluís Mont,et al.  2013 ESC guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy: the task force on cardiac pacing and resynchronization therapy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). , 2013, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[32]  Lluís Mont,et al.  2013 ESC Guidelines on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy: the Task Force on cardiac pacing and resynchronization therapy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). , 2013, European heart journal.

[33]  Giuseppe Boriani,et al.  From lead management to implanted patient management: systematic review and meta-analysis of the last 15 years of experience in lead extraction , 2013, Expert review of medical devices.

[34]  M. Zaccaria,et al.  Rate, causes, and impact on patient outcome of implantable device complications requiring surgical revision: large population survey from two centres in Italy. , 2013, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[35]  K. Ellenbogen,et al.  The Active Fixation Coronary Sinus Lead: More Peril than Promise? , 2012, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[36]  H. Burri,et al.  Introduction of new industry standards for cardiac implantable electronic devices: balancing benefits and unexpected risks , 2012, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[37]  O. Wazni,et al.  Active fixation mechanism complicates coronary sinus lead extraction and limits subsequent reimplantation targets , 2012, Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology.