Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

First time description of early lead failure of the Linox Smart lead compared to other contemporary high-voltage leads

  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Early lead failure has recently been reported in ICD patients with Linox SD leads. We aimed to compare the long-term performance of the following lead model Linox Smart SD with other contemporary high-voltage leads.

Methods

All patients receiving high-voltage leads at our center between November 2009 and May 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Lead failure was defined as the occurrence of one or more of the following: non-physiological high-rate episodes, low- or high-voltage impedance anomalies, undersensing, or non-capture.

Results

In total, 220 patients were included (Linox Smart SD, n = 113; contemporary lead, n = 107). During a median follow-up of 3.8 years (IQR 1.6–5.9 years), a total of 16 (14 in Linox Smart SD and 2 in contemporary group) lead failures occurred, mostly due to non-physiological high-rate sensing or impedance abnormalities. Lead failure incidence rates per 100 person-years were 2.9 (95% CI 1.7–4.9) and 0.6 (95% CI 0.1–2.3) for Linox Smart SD compared to contemporary leads respectively. Kaplan Meier estimates of 5-year lead failure rates were 14.0% (95% CI 8.1–23.6%) and 1.3% (95% CI 0.2–8.9%), respectively (log-rank p = 0.028). Implantation of a Linox Smart SD lead increased the risk of lead failure with a hazard ratio (HR) of 4.53 (95% CI 1.03–19.95, p = 0.046) and 4.44 (95% CI 1.00–19.77, p = 0.05) in uni- and multivariable Cox models.

Conclusions

The new Linox Smart SD lead model was associated with high failure rates and should be monitored closely to detect early signs of lead failure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Providencia R, Kramer DB, Pimenta D, Babu GG, Hatfield LA, Ioannou A, et al. Transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead performance: a meta-analysis of observational studies. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4(11):e002418.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rordorf R, Poggio L, Savastano S, Vicentini A, Petracci B, Chieffo E, et al. Failure of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads: a matter of lead size? Heart Rhythm. 2013;10(2):184–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Good ED, Cakulev I, Orlov MV, Hirsh D, Simeles J, Mohr K, et al. Long-term evaluation of Biotronik Linox and Linox (smart) implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016;27(6):735–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Reichlin T, Kuhne M, Sticherling C. Repetitive inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks due to insulation failure with externalized conductor cables of a Biotronik Linox SD ICD lead. Europace. 2016;18(5):686.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Abi-Saleh B, Refaat MM, Khoury M, Wilkoff B. Conductor externalization of the Biotronik Kentrox internal cardioverter-defibrillator lead: the tip of another iceberg? Heart Rhythm. 2014;11(9):1648–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Howe AJ, McKeag NA, Wilson CM, Ashfield KP, Roberts MJ. Insulation failure of the Linox defibrillator lead: a case report and retrospective review of a single center experience. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2015;26(6):686–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Manfredi JA, Smithgall SM, Kircher CM, Lollis MA. Insulation failure with externalized conductor of a Linox SD lead: a case report. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2014;25(4):440–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. van Malderen SC, Szili-Torok T, Yap SC, Hoeks SE, Zijlstra F, Theuns DA. Comparative study of the failure rates among 3 implantable defibrillator leads. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13(12):2299–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Noti F, Lam A, Klossner N, Seiler J, Servatius H, Medeiros-Domingo A, et al. Failure rate and conductor externalization in the Biotronik Linox/Sorin Vigila implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13(5):1075–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Padfield GJ, Steinberg C, Karim SS, Tung S, Bennett MT, Le Maitre JP, et al. Early failure of the Biotronik Linox implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2015;26(3):274–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kawada S, Nishii N, Morimoto Y, Miyoshi A, Tachibana M, Sugiyama H, et al. Comparison of longevity and clinical outcomes of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads among manufactures. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14:1496–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Biotronik SE & Co KG. Product performance report 2016 2017. Available from: https://biotronik.cdn.mediamid.com/cdn_bio_doc/bio24566/20323/bio24566.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Faulknier BA, Traub DM, Aktas MK, Aguila A, Rosero S, Daubert JP, et al. Time-dependent risk of fidelis lead failure. Am J Cardiol. 2010;105(1):95–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Larsen JM, Riahi S, Johansen JB, Nielsen JC, Petersen HH, Haarbo J, et al. The patient perspective on the Riata defibrillator lead advisory: a Danish nationwide study. Heart Rhythm. 2014;11(12):2148–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hsu JC, Saxon LA, Jones PW, Wehrenberg S, Marcus GM. Utilization trends and clinical outcomes in patients implanted with a single- vs a dual-coil implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead: insights from the ALTITUDE study. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12(8):1770–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Shariff N, Alluri K, Saba S. Failure rates of single- versus dual-coil nonrecalled sprint quattro defibrillator leads. Am J Cardiol. 2015;115(2):202–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Schmutz M, Delacretaz E, Schwick N, Roten L, Fuhrer J, Boesch C, et al. Prevalence of asymptomatic and electrically undetectable intracardiac inside-out abrasion in silicon-coated Riata(R) and Riata(R) ST implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads. Int J Cardiol. 2013;167(1):254–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mehta NK, Taylor M, Kalbfleisch S. The impact of inappropriate implantable cardiac defibrillator shocks on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2016;39(8):858–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kleemann T, Hochadel M, Strauss M, Skarlos A, Seidl K, Zahn R. Comparison between atrial fibrillation-triggered implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks and inappropriate shocks caused by lead failure: different impact on prognosis in clinical practice. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012;23(7):735–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Compare A, Del Forno D, Callus E, Giallauria F, Vitelli A, Buccelli C, et al. Post-traumatic stress disorder, emotional processing and inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks: clinical consideration by a single case report. Monaldi Arch Chest Dis. 2012;78(3):160–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Richard Kobza, MD, has received institutional grant support from Abbott, Biotronik, Biosense Webster, Boston, Medtronic and St. Jude Medical. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Heart Center Lucerne, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland

    Vanessa Weberndörfer, Tobias Nyffenegger, Ian Russi, Miriam Brinkert, Benjamin Berte, Stefan Toggweiler & Richard Kobza

  2. Heart Center Lucerne, Cardiology, Spitalstrasse, 6000, Luzern, Switzerland

    Vanessa Weberndörfer

Authors
  1. Vanessa Weberndörfer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tobias Nyffenegger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ian Russi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Miriam Brinkert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Benjamin Berte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Stefan Toggweiler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Richard Kobza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vanessa Weberndörfer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Weberndörfer, V., Nyffenegger, T., Russi, I. et al. First time description of early lead failure of the Linox Smart lead compared to other contemporary high-voltage leads. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 52, 173–177 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-018-0372-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-018-0372-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation