Suppr超能文献

Sprint Fidelis 与 Riata 除颤器导联故障发生率比较。

Comparison of Sprint Fidelis and Riata defibrillator lead failure rates.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE7 7DN, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Int J Cardiol. 2013 Sep 30;168(2):848-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.10.015. Epub 2012 Nov 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Sprint Fidelis and Riata defibrillator leads are prone to early failure. Few data exist on the comparative failure rates and mortality related to lead failure. The aims of this study were to determine the failure rate of Sprint Fidelis and Riata leads, and to compare failure rates and mortality rates in both groups.

METHODS

Patients implanted with Sprint Fidelis leads and Riata leads at a single centre were identified and in July 2012, records were reviewed to ascertain lead failures, deaths, and relationship to device/lead problems.

RESULTS

113 patients had Sprint Fidelis leads implanted between June 2005 and September 2007; Riata leads were implanted in 106 patients between January 2003 and February 2008. During 53.0 ± 22.3 months of follow-up there were 13 Sprint Fidelis lead failures (11.5%, 2.60% per year) and 25 deaths. Mean time to failure was 45.1 ± 15.5 months. In the Riata lead cohort there were 32 deaths, and 13 lead failures (11.3%, 2.71% per year) over 54.8 ± 26.3 months follow-up with a mean time to failure of 53.5 ± 24.5 months. There were no significant differences in the lead failure-free Kaplan-Meier survival curve (p=0.77), deaths overall (p=0.17), or deaths categorised as sudden/cause unknown (p=0.54).

CONCLUSIONS

Sprint Fidelis and Riata leads have a significant but comparable failure rate at 2.60% per year and 2.71% per year of follow-up respectively. The number of deaths in both groups is similar and no deaths have been identified as being related to lead failure in either cohort.

摘要

背景/目的:Sprint Fidelis 和 Riata 除颤器导联易发生早期故障。关于导联故障的相关比较失败率和死亡率的数据很少。本研究的目的是确定 Sprint Fidelis 和 Riata 导联的失败率,并比较两组的失败率和死亡率。

方法

确定在单一中心植入 Sprint Fidelis 导联和 Riata 导联的患者,并于 2012 年 7 月回顾记录,以确定导联故障、死亡以及与设备/导联问题的关系。

结果

2005 年 6 月至 2007 年 9 月期间,有 113 名患者植入 Sprint Fidelis 导联;2003 年 1 月至 2008 年 2 月期间,有 106 名患者植入 Riata 导联。在 53.0±22.3 个月的随访中,有 13 例 Sprint Fidelis 导联发生故障(11.5%,每年 2.60%)和 25 例死亡。平均故障时间为 45.1±15.5 个月。在 Riata 导联组中,有 32 例死亡和 13 例导联故障(11.3%,每年 2.71%),随访时间为 54.8±26.3 个月,平均故障时间为 53.5±24.5 个月。在导联无故障的 Kaplan-Meier 生存曲线(p=0.77)、总死亡率(p=0.17)或分类为猝死/原因不明的死亡率(p=0.54)方面无显著差异。

结论

Sprint Fidelis 和 Riata 导联的失败率分别为每年 2.60%和 2.71%,但差异显著。两组的死亡人数相似,且两组均未发现与导联故障相关的死亡。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验