An active fixation quadripolar left ventricular lead for cardiac resynchronization therapy with reduced postoperative complication rates
Calum Robertson, Owen J Duffey, Pok‐Tin Tang, Natalie Fairhurst, Cristiana Monteiro, Peregrine Green, Joanna Grogono, Mark Davies, Andrew Lewis, Rohan S. Wijesurendra, Julian O.M. Ormerod, James Gamble, Matthew Ginks, Kim Rajappan, Yaver Bashir, Timothy R. Betts, Neil Herring
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rate of left ventricular (LV) lead displacement after cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) remains high despite improvements in lead technology. In 2017, a novel quadripolar lead with active fixation technology became available in the UK. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study analyzing device complications in 476 consecutive patients undergoing successful first-time implantation of a CRT device at a tertiary center from 2017 to 2020. RESULTS: Both active (n = 135) and passive fixation (n = 341) quadripolar leads had similar success rates for implantation (99.3% vs. 98.8%, p = 1.00), although the pacing threshold (0.89 [0.60-1.25] vs. 1.00 [0.70-1.60] V, p = .01) and lead impedance (632 [552-794] vs. 730 [636-862] Ohms, p < .0001) were significantly lower for the active fixation lead. Patients receiving an active fixation lead had a reduced incidence of lead displacement at 6 months (0.74% vs. 4.69%, p = .036). There was no significant difference in the rate of right atrial (RA) and right ventricular (RV) lead displacement between the two groups (RA: 1.48% vs. 1.17%, p = .68; RV: 2.22% vs. 1.76%, p = .72). Reprogramming the LV lead after displacement was unsuccessful in most cases (successful reprogramming: Active fix = 0/1, Passive fix = 1/16) therefore nearly all patients required a repeat procedure. As a result, the rate of intervention within 6 months for lead displacement was significantly lower when patients were implanted with the active fixation lead (0.74% vs. 4.40%, p = .049). CONCLUSION: The novel active fixation lead in our study has a lower incidence of lead displacement and re-intervention compared to conventional quadripolar leads for CRT.