Complication Risk with Pulse Generator Change: Implications When Reacting to a Device Advisory or Recall
- 1 June 2007
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
- Vol. 30 (6) , 730-733
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.2007.00742.x
Abstract
Recent advisories and recalls of pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have highlighted the need for evidence-based recommendations regarding management of patients with advisory devices. In order to better facilitate decision-making when weighing the relative risks and benefits of performing generator changes in these patients, we conducted a review to assess operative complication rates. We reviewed generator changes performed between 2000 and 2005 at the Mayo Clinic-Rochester, including a total of 732 change-outs consisting of 570 done for elective replacement indicators (ERI) and 162 for manufacturer advisories or recalls. Complications included all those requiring reoperation, occurring within a 60-day period postoperatively and directly attributable to the generator change. These included infection requiring device excision, hematoma requiring evacuation, and incisional dehiscence requiring reclosure. Operation-associated complications requiring intervention were noted in 9 patients, or 1.24% of our population. Of these nine complications, eight occurred among patients receiving pulse generator replacement for ERI (1.40%) and one occurred in a patient receiving replacement for a manufacturer advisory or recall (0.62%). Complications included 5 infections, 3 hematomas, and 1 incisional dehiscence. Generator replacement is not a benign procedure and associated risks must be weighed in the context of other variables when making management choices in patients with advisory or recall devices.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Recommendations of the European Cardiac Arrhythmia Society Committee on Device Failures and ComplicationsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2006
- Pacemaker and ICD Generator MalfunctionsJAMA, 2006
- Complications Associated With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Replacement in Response to Device AdvisoriesJAMA, 2006
- Unpredictable implantable cardioverter-defibrillator pulse generator failure due to electrical overstress causing sudden death in a young high-risk patient with hypertrophic cardiomyopathyHeart Rhythm, 2005
- Amiodarone or an Implantable Cardioverter–Defibrillator for Congestive Heart FailureNew England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Prophylactic Use of an Implantable Cardioverter–Defibrillator after Acute Myocardial InfarctionNew England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- The Recall Genie:Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2004
- Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study (CIDS)Circulation, 2000
- A Comparison of Antiarrhythmic-Drug Therapy with Implantable Defibrillators in Patients Resuscitated from Near-Fatal Ventricular ArrhythmiasNew England Journal of Medicine, 1997
- Management of Intracardiac Device Recalls: A Consensus ConferencePacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1996