Complications of Third‐Generation Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy
- 1 January 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
- Vol. 22 (1) , 206-211
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.1999.tb00334.x
Abstract
To determine the incidence of complications of third‐generation implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy, 144 patients were prospectively studied who underwent first implant of third‐generation devices (i.e., ICD systems with biphasic shocks, ECC storage capability, and nonthoracotomy lead systems). During 21 ± 15 months of follow‐up, 41 (28%) patients had one or more complications. No patient died perioperatively (30 days) and no ICD infection was observed during follow‐up. Complications included bleeding or pocket hematoma (hemoglobin drop > 2 g/dL) in 5 (3%) patients, prolonged reversible ischemic neurological deficit in 1 (1%) patient, postoperative deep venous thrombosis of leg in 1 (1%) patient, pneumothorax in 2 (1%) patients, difficulty to defibrillate ventricular fibrillation intraoperatively in 2 (1%) patients, generator malfunction in 1 (1%) patient, arthritis of the shoulder in 3 (2%) patients, and allergic reaction to prophylactic antibiotics in 2 (1%) patients. A total of seven lead related complications were observed in six (4%) patients including endocardial lead migration in four (3%) patients. Twenty‐three (16%) patients received inappropriate shocks for supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (n = 13), non‐sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) (n = 7), or myopotential oversensing (n = 3). We conclude that serious complications such as perioperative death or ICD infection are rare in patients with third‐generation ICDs. Lead‐related problems and inappropriate shocks during follow‐up are the most frequent complications of third‐generation ICD therapy. Recognition of these complications should promote advances in ICD technology and management strategies to avoid their recurrence.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Failure of Third‐Generation Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators to Abort Shock Therapy for onsustained Ventricular Tachycardia Due to Shortcomings of the VF Confirmation AlgorithmPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1998
- Complications Associated with Pectoral Implantation of Cardioverter DefibrillatorsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1997
- Multicenter Experience With a Pectoral Unipolar Implantable Cardioverter-DefibrillatorJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1996
- Compatibility of a nonthoracotomy lead system with a biphasic implantable cardioverter-defibrillatorThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1996
- Failures of epicardial and transvenous leads for implantable cardioverter defibrillatorsAmerican Heart Journal, 1995
- Postoperative lead-related complications in patients with nonthoracotomy defibrillation lead systemsJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1995
- Comparison of implantation of nonthoracotomy defibrillators in the operating room versus the electrophysiology laboratoryThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1995
- Three-year outcome of a nonthoracotomy approach to cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in 189 consecutive patientsThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1994
- Experience with Two Different Nonthoracotomy Systems for Implantable Defibrillator in 170 PatientsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1994
- Smooth muscle cell proliferation and restenosis after stand alone coronary excimer laser angioplastyJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1991