Key result
The EMT 588 endocardial pacing lead with a small electrode surface area demonstrated a 9-year cumulative survival rate of 84%, compared to 72% for the large electrode series.
Why the study?
What is the long-term durability and nature of failure of the EMT 588 endocardial pacing lead?
Population
1063 patients receiving 1253 EMT 588 endocardial leads
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
up to 20 years
Authors
Loading...
Smaller electrode surface area may enhance endocardial lead durability; leaves open insulation-related late failure risks in modern devices.
Observational (n=1,063)
What is the long-term durability and nature of failure of the EMT 588 endocardial pacing lead?
Absolute Event Rate: 84% vs 72%
The EMT 588 endocardial pacing lead showed improved survival with a smaller electrode surface area, though polyethylene insulation remained a vulnerability leading to late failures.
MAJ LEVANDER‐LINDGREN (1988) conducted an observational in Patients requiring endocardial pacing (n=1,063). EMT 588 endocardial pacing lead (small electrode surface area, 8-12 mm2) vs. EMT 588 endocardial pacing lead (large electrode surface area, 47 mm2) was evaluated on Cumulative lead survival rate at 9 years. The EMT 588 endocardial pacing lead with a small electrode surface area demonstrated a 9-year cumulative survival rate of 84%, compared to 72% for the large electrode series.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: