Comparative outcomes of Riata and Fidelis lead management strategies: Results from the NCDR‐ICD Registry. Issue 11 (28th September 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zeitler, Emily P.; Wang, Yongfei; Pokorney, Sean D.; Curtis, Jeptha; Prutkin, Jordan M.
• Is Part Of: Pacing and clinical electrophysiology. Volume 44:Issue 11(2021)
• Page Start: 1897
• Page End: 1906
• Publication Date: 2021-09-28
• Subjects: fidelis -- lead extraction -- mortality -- Riata; Cardiac pacing -- Periodicals; Electrophysiology -- Periodicals; 617.4120645
• DOI: 10.1111/pace.14361
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0147-8389

Abstract

Abstract: Background: The Medtronic Sprint Fidelis® and Abbott Riata®/Riata ST® leads are at risk of failure and are subject to FDA recall. Comparative risks of various lead management strategies during elective generator change in a multi‐center population are unknown. We aim to describe patients with functional, recalled ICD leads undergoing elective generator replacement and report outcomes according to lead management strategies. Methods: Using data from the NCDR ICD Registry, patients with a functioning Riata® or Fidelis® lead undergoing generator replacement are described according to lead management: reuse, abandon/replace, and extract/replace. Adjusted rates of death and pre‐discharge complications are reported. Results: There were 13, 144 generator replacement procedures involving a functioning, non‐infected Riata® or Fidelis® lead (extraction n = 414, abandonment n = 427). Extraction patients were younger (mean 58 vs. 67 years) with fewer comorbidities than the reuse group. Maximum lead dwell time was similar between groups with average 94, 90, and 99 months in the extraction, abandonment, and reuse groups, respectively. In‐hospital complications or mortality were more common in the extraction group (10.14%, 4.35%) compared with abandonment (1.64%, 0.47%) and reuse (0.22%, 0.07%). Compared with reuse, the adjusted odds of death or pre‐discharge complication were significantly higher in the extraction group (OR 7.77 95% CI 2.42–24.95, p < .001) but not the abandonment group (OR 1.70 95% CI 0.52–5.61, p = .38). Conclusions: In this real‐world population, extraction of functional recalled ICD leads was associated with significant risk of in‐hospital mortality and complications. Additional work is needed to clarify whether longer term outcomes balance these peri‐procedural risks.