Epicardial vs. transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillators in children

Author:

Le Bos Pierre Antoine1ORCID,Pontailler Margaux2ORCID,Maltret Alice1ORCID,Kraiche Diala1ORCID,Gaudin Regis2,Barbanti Claudio3,Marijon Eloi45ORCID,Raisky Olivier24,Bonnet Damien146,Waldmann Victor1456ORCID

Affiliation:

1. M3C-Necker, Hôpital Universitaire Necker-Enfants Malades , 149 rue de Sèvres, 75015 Paris , France

2. Department of Pediatric Cardiac Surgery, Necker Hospital , 149 rue de Sèvres, 75015 Paris , France

3. Pediatric Cardiac Anesthesia and Cardiopulmonary Unit, Necker Hospital , 149 rue de Sèvres, 75015 Paris , France

4. Université de Paris Cité, INSERM, Paris Cardiovascular Research Centre , 56 rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris , France

5. Electrophysiology Unit, European Georges Pompidou Hospital , 20 rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris , France

6. Adult Congenital Heart Disease Medico-Surgical Unit, European Georges Pompidou Hospital , 20 rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris , France

Abstract

AbstractAimsThe implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has been increasingly used in children. Both epicardial and transvenous approaches are used, with controversy regarding the best option with no specific recommendations. We aimed to compare outcomes associated with epicardial vs. transvenous ICDs in children.Methods and resultsData were analysed from a retrospective study including all patients <18-year-old implanted with an ICD in a tertiary centre from 2003 to 2021. Outcomes were compared between epicardial and transvenous ICDs. A total of 122 children with an ICD (mean age 11.5 ± 3.8 years, 57.4% males) were enrolled, with 84 (64.1%) epicardial ICDs and 38 (29.0%) transvenous ICDs. Early (<30 days) ICD-related complications were reported in 17 (20.2%) patients with an epicardial ICD vs. 0 (0.0%) with a transvenous ICD (P = 0.002). Over a mean follow-up of 4.8 ± 4.0 years, 25 (29.8%) patients with an epicardial ICD and 9 (23.7%) patients with a transvenous ICD experienced at least one late ICD-related complication [hazard ratio (HR) 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8–4.0]. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead dysfunction occurred in 19 (22.6%) patients with an epicardial ICD vs. 3 (7.9%) with a transvenous ICD (HR 5.7, 95% CI 1.3–24.5) and was associated with a higher incidence of ICD-related reintervention (HR 3.0, 95% CI 1.3–7.0). After considering potential confounders, especially age and weight at implantation, this association was no longer significant (P = 0.112). The freedom from ICD lead dysfunction was greater in patients with pleural coils than in those with epicardial coils (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.15–0.96).ConclusionIn children, after a consideration of patient characteristics at implantation, the burden of complications and ICD lead dysfunction appears to be similar in patients with epicardial and transvenous devices. Pleural coils seem to be associated with better outcomes than epicardial coils in this population.Clinical Trial RegistrationNCT05349162.

Funder

French Institute of Health and Medical Research

Fédération Française de Cardiologie

Société Française de Cardiologie

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3