Why the study?
Does the IE-65-I transvenous lead reduce lead failure requiring invasive correction compared to other transvenous leads in patients undergoing endocardial pacing?
Population
276 implants of transvenous leads for endocardial pacing
Comparison
IE-65-I transvenous lead vs 6907, continuous lead, and MIP 2000 transvenous…
Design
Cohort, Implants randomly distributed between two surgeons
Follow-up
minimum of two months
Authors
Loading...
IE-65-I was associated with lower failure; hypothesis-generating for lead design in endocardial pacing.
Does the IE-65-I transvenous lead reduce lead failure requiring invasive correction compared to other transvenous leads in patients undergoing endocardial pacing?
The design of the transvenous lead is a major factor in the need for early secondary intervention, with the IE-65-I lead demonstrating significantly lower failure rates.
Furman et al. (1979) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: