Abstract:Background: Substernal lead placement of the extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (EV ICD) permits both defibrillation at thresholds similar to those seen with transvenous ICDs and effective antitachycardia pacing (ATP), while avoiding the vasculature and associated complications. The global Pivotal study has shown the EV ICD system to be safe and effective through 6 months, but long-term experience has yet to be published. We aim to report the performance and safety of the EV ICD system throughout the study. Methods: The EV ICD Pivotal study was a prospective, global, single-arm, pre-market clinical study. Individuals with a class I or IIa indication for a single-chamber ICD per guidelines were enrolled. Freedom from major system- or procedure-related complications, as well as appropriate and inappropriate therapy rates, were assessed through 3 years using the Kaplan-Meier method. Anti-tachycardia pacing success was calculated using simple proportions. Results: An implant was attempted in 316 patients [25.3% female, 53.8±13.1 years old, 81.6% primary prevention, LVEF 38.9%±15.4%]. Of 299 patients with a successful implant, 24 experienced 82 spontaneous arrhythmic episodes that were appropriately treated with either ATP only (38, 46.3%), shock only (34, 41.5%), or both (10, 12.2%) for a Kaplan-Meier-estimated rate of first any appropriate therapy of 9.2% at 3 years. Antitachycardia pacing was successful in 77.1% (37/48) of episodes, and ATP usage significantly increased from discharge to last follow-up visit (P<0.0001). Shock therapy was successful in 100% (27/27) of discrete, spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias. The inappropriate shock rates at 1 and 3 years were 9.8% and 17.5%, respectively, with P-wave oversensing the predominant cause. No major intraprocedural complications were reported and the estimated freedom from system- or procedure-related major complications was 91.9% at 1 year and 89.0% at 3 years. The most common major complications were lead dislodgement (10 events; n=9 patients, 2.8%), postoperative wound or device pocket infection (n=8, 2.5%), and device inappropriate shock delivery (n=4, 1.3%). Twenty-four system revisions were performed as a result of major complications related to the EV ICD system or procedure. Conclusions: From implant to study completion, the EV ICD Pivotal study demonstrated that a single integrated system with an extravascular lead placed in the substernal space maintains high ATP success, effective defibrillation, and a consistent safety profile.

Risk Factors and Temporal Trends of Complications Associated With Transvenous Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator Leads.

Cardiac Device Implantation: Techniques and Best Practices

Lead Management: Device Programming and Defibrillation Threshold Testing

Trends and outcomes of inpatient cardiac implantable electronic device transvenous lead extractions: a nationwide analysis

Outer insulation failure in a multilumen ICD lead.

Perioperative Safety and Early Patient and Device Outcomes Among Subcutaneous Versus Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantations : A Randomized, Multicenter Trial

Prevalence and management of electrical lead abnormalities in cardiac implantable electronic device leads

Extraction and Reimplantation of a Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: Two Cases and a Review of the Literature

A Rare Complication of Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator Placement

Risk factors for severe complications of transvenous lead extraction

Failure of Transvenous ICD to Terminate Ventricular Fibrillation in a Patient with Left Ventricular Noncompaction and Polycystic Kidneys

Impact of infective versus sterile transvenous lead removal on 30-day outcomes in cardiac implantable electronic devices

Performance and Safety of the Extravascular Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Through Long-Term Follow-Up: Final Results From the Pivotal Study

The development of the extravascular defibrillator with substernal lead placement: A new Frontier for device-based treatment of sudden cardiac arrest

Short- and Long-Term Risk of Lead Dislodgement Events: Real-World Experience From Product Surveillance Registry

Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Lead Safety: Harnessing Real-World Remote Monitoring Data for Medical Device Evaluation

Abstract 15350: Differing Impacts of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Leads on Tricuspid Regurgitation

Tricuspid regurgitation associated with implantable electrical device insertion: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Lb-469803-01 Leadr In Defibrillation: Global Pivotal Trial Results Of A Novel, Small-Diameter Defibrillation Lead Designed For Reliability

Analysis of Risk Factors for Major Complications of 1500 Transvenous Lead Extraction Procedures with Especial Attention to Tricuspid Valve Damage

Transvenous Extraction and Removal of Pacing Leads Placed after Cardiac Transplantation