Abstract 78: Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Lead Safety: Harnessing Real-world Remote Monitoring Data For Medical Device Evaluation
Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
Abstract
Background: Current important regulatory resources and methods to identify cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) lead failure include post-approval studies, which may be limited in scope, participant numbers, and by attrition; studies relying on administrative codes, which lack specificity in multi-chamber systems; and voluntary adverse event reporting, which cannot determine incidence or attribution to the lead. We determined whether adjudicated remote monitoring (RM) data can help to address these limitations and augment lead safety evaluation.
Methods: We evaluated 48,148 patients from the Veterans Affairs National Cardiac Device Surveillance Program (VANCDSP), 4/1/19-4/1/21. We identified RM transmissions signifying incident lead abnormalities (possible lead failure, failure to capture, impedance out of range). We queried VA electronic health record (EHR) and Medicare fee-for-service claims data to determine if patients had administrative codes for lead failure. We verified structural lead failure through manual EHR review. Among patients with EHR-confirmed lead failure, we categorized subsequent clinical actions by cardiac chamber.
Results: Of 48,148 actively monitored patients with CIEDs, 1174 (2.4%) had incident lead abnormalities detected on RM; 356 (30.3%) with administrative codes for lead failure and 818 (69.7%) without. Of the 356 patients, 220 (62%) had lead failure verified through chart review (positive predictive value [PPV], 62%). Among 276 patients randomly selected from 818 without administrative codes, 58 (26%) had EHR-confirmed lead failure (PPV, 21%). Patients with isolated right atrial or left ventricular lead failure were less likely to have claims and lead replacement procedures than those with right ventricular high-energy lead failure (Table).
Conclusion: Remote monitoring may strengthen accurate real-world assessment of lead failure, particularly for leads where patients do not undergo replacement.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2022 by American Heart Association, Inc.
History
Published in print: May 2022
Published online: 12 May 2022
Keywords
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
View Options
View options
PDF and All Supplements
Download PDF and All SupplementsLogin options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Personal login Institutional LoginPurchase Options
Purchase this article to access the full text.
eLetters(0)
eLetters should relate to an article recently published in the journal and are not a forum for providing unpublished data. Comments are reviewed for appropriate use of tone and language. Comments are not peer-reviewed. Acceptable comments are posted to the journal website only. Comments are not published in an issue and are not indexed in PubMed. Comments should be no longer than 500 words and will only be posted online. References are limited to 10. Authors of the article cited in the comment will be invited to reply, as appropriate.
Comments and feedback on AHA/ASA Scientific Statements and Guidelines should be directed to the AHA/ASA Manuscript Oversight Committee via its Correspondence page.