SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

Article citations

More>>

Mond, H.G., Hua, W. and Wang, C.C. (1995) Atrial Pacing Leads: The Clinical Contribution of Steroid Elution. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 18, 1601-1608.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.1995.tb06981.x

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Safety, Handling and Electrical Performances of Bradycardia Leads in Acute Conditions: Results from the FINE Registry

    AUTHORS: Henri Benkemoun, Sébastien Prevot, José Antonio Lapuerta, Xavier Dessenne, Pierre Khattar, Mara Rolando, Philippe Deutsch, Roger Villuendas

    KEYWORDS: Bradycardia Lead, Acute Lead Performance, Lead Handling, Lead Safety, Active Fixation Lead, Passive Fixation Lead, X-Fine, Beflex

    JOURNAL NAME: World Journal of Cardiovascular Diseases, Vol.5 No.11, November 17, 2015

    ABSTRACT: Background: Beflex is an active fixation atrial and ventricular lead with a retractable screw; X-Fine is a passive fixation ventricular lead. These two bradycardia lead models were evaluated in the FINE study, an observational prospective trial conducted in France and Spain. Methods: Patients enlisted for pacemaker or defibrillator implants were enrolled. The primary objective was to assess acute dislodgement rates at the 3-month follow-up visit. Safety and electrical performances of the leads were assessed in acute conditions at implant and at the follow-up visit up to three months later. A handling questionnaire was submitted to implanting investigators immediately after implant. Results: A total of 2254 patients were enrolled in 95 centers; investigators implanted 1153 active atrial leads, mainly in the right atrium; 1021 active right ventricular leads, mainly in the septum and 712 passive right ventricular leads, mainly in the apex. After a mean follow-up of 54.9 ± 37.6 days, dislodgement rates were 1.0% and 1.6% for atrial and ventricular active, and 3.2% for ventricular passive leads. No unexpected adverse reactions were observed during the course of the study and the electrical performances at implant and follow-up visits remained within normal ranges. Overall, most investigators (84%) rated leads’ handling as superior (better or best) to what observed with other bradycardia leads. Conclusion: Different bradycardia leads showed a dislodgement rate of 1.0% and 1.6% for atrial and ventricular active leads, and 3.2% for ventricular passive leads, at 3-month follow-up. Acute safety and electrical performances were within expected ranges and very good handling performances were observed.