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>>

Ghani, A., Delnoy, P.P., Ramdat Misier, A.R., Smit, J.J., Adiyaman, A., Ottervanger, J.P., et al. (2014) Incidence of Lead Dislodgement, Malfunction and Perforation during the First Year Following Device Implantation. Netherlands Heart Journal, 22, 286-291.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-014-0556-6

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.