Do electrode and lead design differences for permanent cardiac pacing translate into clinically demonstrable differences? (Comparison of sintered platinum and activated vitreous and porous carbon electrodes).

A randomized prospective study was undertaken to compare the electrical performances of three permanent, endocardial, tined pacing leads with different electrode designs--sintered platinum, vitreous carbon, and porous carbon. Ninety-nine patients received one of the leads (S80 31; 423S 32; S100 36). Acute R wave amplitude and ST elevation of the native endocardial electrogram, voltage threshold, impedance, and current flow at four pulse durations (0.25-1.0 msec) were measured. Voltage thresholds were measured noninvasively at each of four pulse durations at 2 days and 1, 3, and 6 months after implantation. No significant differences were found in sensing properties, or current flow at threshold at 0.5 msec pulse duration. The 423S lead had a significantly higher impedance at threshold and both a higher impedance and lower current flow at 5 V. No significant differences in threshold voltages were found between the three leads at any pulse duration, at any of the assessed times after implantation. Six-month thresholds for the S80, 423S, and S100 leads were 1.18 +/- 0.35, 1.17 +/- 0.29, and 1.06 +/- 0.38 V respectively at 0.5 msec pulse duration. Differences between 'high performance' pacing leads need to be of a greater order of magnitude before they can be exploited to give any real clinical advantage to patients.