Impact of fracture-prone implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads on long-term patient mortality

BackgroundThe long-term relationship between fracture-prone implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads and poor prognosis remains unclear in Japanese patients. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of the records of 445 patients who underwent implantation of advisory/Linox leads (Sprint Fidelis, 118; Riata, nine; Isoline, 10; Linox S/SD, 45) and non-advisory leads (Endotak Reliance, 33; Durata, 199; Sprint non-Fidelis, 31) between January 2005 and June 2012 at our hospital. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and ICD lead failure. The secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, and the composite outcome of cardiovascular mortality and HF hospitalization. ResultsDuring the follow-up period (median, 8.6 [4.1-12.0] years), there were 152 deaths: 61 (34%) in patients with advisory/Linox leads and 91 (35%) in those with non-advisory leads. There were 32 ICD lead failures: 27 (15%) in patients with advisory/Linox leads and five (2%) in those with non-advisory leads. Multivariate analysis for ICD lead failure demonstrated that the advisory/Linox leads had a 6.65-fold significantly greater risk of ICD lead failure than non-advisory leads. Congenital heart disease (hazard ratio 2.51; 95% confidence interval 1.08-5.83; p = .03) could also independently predict ICD lead failure. Multivariate analysis for all-cause mortality demonstrated no significant association between advisory/Linox leads and all-cause mortality. ConclusionsPatients who have implanted fracture-prone ICD leads should be carefully followed up for ICD lead failure. However, these patients have a long-term survival rate comparable with that of patients with non-advisory ICD leads in Japanese patients.