Back to Search Start Over

Multiple Adverse Events with a Dual Chamber Pacemaker

Authors :
Sergei Yaroslavtzev
Zeev Rotstein
David Bar-Lev
Michael Eldar
Osnat Gurevitz
Elad Yaacobi
Shlomo Feldman
Michael Glikson
Source :
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. 23:1010-1013
Publication Year :
2000
Publisher :
Wiley, 2000.

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate our experience with Physiocor 400T, a dual chamber unipolar pacemaker manufactured by Sorin Biomedica. Between March 1993 and December 1994, 63 units of that model were implanted at our center. Patients were followed for 46 +/- 16 months. By the end of follow-up, 15 patients had died, 1 patient was lost to follow-up, and two units had been replaced for unrelated reasons. During follow-up the following phenomena had been observed: (1) Spontaneous backup reversion (VOO, 80 ppm) in 6 (9.5%) of 63 patients. In three patients this phenomenon was accompanied by concomitant ineffective pacing artifacts at 130 beats/min with very low pulse widths. (2) Unexpected battery depletion (EOL) occurred in 3 (5%) of 63 patients; two of the three occurred within weeks of routine evaluation that confirmed normal battery status. (3) Early elective replacement time (ERT) unpreceded by a gradual drop in magnet rate in 2 (3.2%) of 63 patients. (4) Total loss of telemetry without change in pacing mode in 1 (1.6%) of 63 patients. The estimated event-free 5-year survival of this model was 46%. In conclusion, 12 (19%) of 63 patients had adverse events with Physiocor 400T pacemakers. The potential risk of asynchronous pacing for prolonged periods and the risk of unexpected EOL warrants consideration of elective replacement of all remaining units.

Details

ISSN :
15408159 and 01478389
Volume :
23
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....adbc7485f7d7dd2c40f7759302ef0caf