Battery longevity in cardiac resynchronization therapy implantable cardioverter defibrillators

• Published in: Europace (London, England) England), 2014-02, Vol.16 (2), p.246-251
• Main Authors: Alam, Mian Bilal, Munir, Muhammad Bilal, Rattan, Rohit, Flanigan, Susan, Adelstein, Evan, Jain, Sandeep, Saba, Samir
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy - adverse effects; Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices; Defibrillators, Implantable; Device Removal; Electric Countershock - adverse effects; Electric Countershock - instrumentation; Electric Power Supplies; Equipment Design; Equipment Failure; Female; Heart Failure - diagnosis; Heart Failure - physiopathology; Heart Failure - therapy; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Middle Aged; Pennsylvania; Retrospective Studies; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1099-5129; 1532-2092
• DOI: 10.1093/europace/eut301

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) deliver high burden ventricular pacing to heart failure patients, which has a significant effect on battery longevity. The aim of this study was to investigate whether battery longevity is comparable for CRT-ICDs from different manufacturers in a contemporary cohort of patients. All the CRT-ICDs implanted at our institution from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2010 were included in this analysis. Baseline demographic and clinical data were collected on all patients using the electronic medical record. Detailed device information was collected on all patients from scanned device printouts obtained during routine follow-up. The primary endpoint was device replacement for battery reaching the elective replacement indicator (ERI). A total of 646 patients (age 69 ± 13 years), implanted with CRT-ICDs (Boston Scientific 173, Medtronic 416, and St Jude Medical 57) were included in this analysis. During 2.7 ± 1.5 years follow-up, 113 (17%) devices had reached ERI (Boston scientific 4%, Medtronic 25%, and St Jude Medical 7%, P < 0.001). The 4-year survival rate of device battery was significantly worse for Medtronic devices compared with devices from other manufacturers (94% for Boston scientific, 67% for Medtronic, and 92% for St Jude Medical, P < 0.001). The difference in battery longevity by manufacturer was independent of pacing burden, lead parameters, and burden of ICD therapy. There are significant discrepancies in CRT-ICD battery longevity by manufacturer. These data have important implications on clinical practice and patient outcomes.