Key result
Biotronik Linox and Linox Smart ICD leads show similar ~96% cumulative survival probabilities.
Why the study?
Are Biotronik Linox and Linox(smart) ICD leads safe and reliable over long-term follow-up in ICD and CRT-D patients?
Observational (n=3,840)
Yes
Are Biotronik Linox and Linox(smart) ICD leads safe and reliable over long-term follow-up in ICD and CRT-D patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 96.3% vs 96.6%
p-value: p=0.2155
Biotronik Linox and Linox(smart) ICD leads demonstrate high long-term survival probabilities (>96% at 4-5 years) with low rates of lead-related adverse events in a large US registry.
Supports lead reliability in this US registry; leaves open need for randomized or broader-population confirmation.
INTRODUCTION: Expert consensus holds that post-market, systematic surveillance of ICD leads is essential to ensure confirmation of adequate lead performance. GALAXY (NCT00836589) and CELESTIAL (NCT00810264) are ongoing multicenter, prospective, non-randomized registries conducted to confirm the long-term safety and reliability of Biotronik leads. METHODS AND RESULTS: ICD and CRT-D patients are followed for Linox and Linox(smart) ICD lead performance and safety for 5 years post-implant. All procedural and system-related adverse events (AEs) were assessed at each follow-up, along with lead electrical parameters. An independent CEC of EPs adjudicated AEs to determine AE category and lead relatedness. The analysis used categories of lead observations per ISO 5841-2 (Third edition). A total of 3,933 leads were implanted in 3,840 patients (73.0% male, mean age 67.0 ± 12.2 years) at 146 US centers. The estimated cumulative survival probability was 96.3% at 5 years after implant for Linox leads and 96.6% at 4 years after implant for Linox(smart) leads. A comparison of the Linox and Linox(smart) survival functions did not find evidence of a difference (P = 0.2155). The most common AEs were oversensing (23, 0.58%), conductor fracture (14, 0.36%), failure to capture (13, 0.33%), lead dislodgement (12, 0.31%), insulation breach (10, 0.25%), and abnormal pacing impedance (8, 0.20%). CONCLUSIONS: Linox and Linox(smart) ICD leads are safe, reliable and infrequently associated with lead-related AEs. Additionally, estimated cumulative survival probability is clinically acceptable and well within industry standards. Ongoing data collection will confirm the longer-term safety and performance of the Linox family of ICD leads.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Good et al. (2016) conducted an observational in ICD and CRT-D patients (n=3,840). Biotronik Linox and Linox(smart) ICD leads vs. Linox vs Linox(smart) was evaluated on Estimated cumulative survival probability (p=0.2155). Biotronik Linox and Linox(smart) ICD leads demonstrated high cumulative survival probabilities of 96.3% at 5 years and 96.6% at 4 years, respectively, with no significant difference (P=0.2155).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: