Heart Rhythm
Volume 7, Issue 2 , Pages 193-198, February 2010

System survival of nontransvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators compared to transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in pediatric and congenital heart disease patients

  • Andrew E. Radbill, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiology, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • ,
  • John K. Triedman, MD, FHRS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiology, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • ,
  • Charles I. Berul, MD, FHRS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiology, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • ,
  • Francis Fynn-Thompson, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiac Surgery, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • ,
  • Joseph Atallah, MD, FRCPC

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiology, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • ,
  • Mark E. Alexander, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiology, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • ,
  • Edward P. Walsh, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiology, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • ,
  • Frank Cecchin, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Cardiology, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Frank Cecchin, Department of Cardiology, Children's Hospital Boston, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115

Received 17 June 2009; accepted 11 October 2009. published online 16 October 2009.

Background

Nontransvenous (NTV) implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) systems with pericardial and/or subcutaneous coils are used in select pediatric and congenital heart disease patients who are not candidates for transvenous ICD leads. Outcomes with these hybrid configurations are not well understood.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to compare survival of NTV ICD systems to standard transvenous (TV) ICD systems.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective single-center study in which the TV group was matched to the NTV group 2:1 by type of cardiac disease and implant date.

Results

There were 39 patients in the NTV group and 78 matched in the TV group. Compared to the TV group, the NTV group was younger (median 7 vs 20 years) with a smaller body surface area at implant (0.9 vs 1.8 m2; both P <.001). Median follow-up in the NTV group was 17 months. System survival at 12, 24, and 36 months was 73%, 55%, and 49% in the NTV group versus 91%, 83%, and 76% in the TV group (P = .003). A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model including group, body surface area, and age at implant revealed the NTV group to be an independent predictor of system failure (hazard ratio 2.9, P = .04). Rate of total unanticipated interventions in the NTV group was 18 versus 6 per 1,000 person-months in the TV group. In patients with NTV systems, 23% received appropriate shocks and 18% received inappropriate shocks.

Conclusion

Survival of ICD systems using NTV defibrillation coils is significantly shorter than with TV ICD systems. Although NTV systems provide protection for this unique subset of patients, more durable options are needed.

Keywords: Congenital heart defect, Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, Pediatric patient, Treatment outcome

Abbreviations: ICD, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, NTV, nontransvenous, TV, transvenous

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Supported in part by the John R. Grey IV Cardiology Fellowship Fund at Children's Hospital, Department of Cardiology. Dr. Cecchin has received consulting fees and speaker honoraria from St. Jude Medical and Boston Scientific. Dr. Triedman has received consulting fees from Biosense Webster and Boston Scientific. Dr. Walsh has received speaker honoraria from St. Jude Medical and Boston Scientific.

PII: S1547-5271(09)01178-3

doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2009.10.014

Heart Rhythm
Volume 7, Issue 2 , Pages 193-198, February 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution