4.1 Article

Long-term performance of active-fixation pacing leads: A prospective study

Journal

PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 29, Issue 3, Pages 226-230

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2006.00327.x

Keywords

pacemakers; pacemaker leads

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Despite the increasingly widespread use of active-fixation leads, long-term clinical follow-up of pacing lead outcomes is lacking. The aim was to analyze pacing parameters over a 2-year follow-up. We performed a prospective observational study of consecutive new pacemaker implants using the 1488T St. Jude (100) and the Medtronic 5076 (100) active-fixation leads. Detailed analysis of pacing parameters was collected at implant, day 1, and 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Methods and Results: One hundred patients underwent implantation of 100 dual-chamber pacemakers. Initial pacing parameters in the ventricle were threshold 0.7 +/- 0.2 V, R wave 12.0 +/- 6.5 mV, and impedance 879 +/- 224 Omega. Threshold increased significantly from day 1 (0.7 +/- 0.2 V) to month 1 (0.9 +/- 0.6 V, P < 0.01) and remained stable over the long term. Four of the 100 patients had a threshold > 2 V (mean 3.3 +/- 0.9 V) all between day 1 and month 3. For all patients, R wave remained stable, but impedance declined significantly from day 1 (879 +/- 184 Omega) to month 1 (677 +/- 122 Omega, P < 0.01). There were no ventricular lead complications. Initial pacing parameters in the atrium were threshold 0.9 +/- 0.3 V, P wave 3.3 +/- 2.4 mV, and impedance 606 +/- 144 Omega. Threshold remained stable over the long-term follow-up. One of 100 patients had a rise in threshold > 2 V (2.2 V) between day 1 and month 1. No patients underwent lead repositioning. Sensing and impedance remained stable over the long term. Patient follow-up was completed in 94% (6 unrelated deaths). There was an 8% incidence of atrial fibrillation. Conclusion: Active-fixation leads are generally associated with stable long-term pacing parameters.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available