Cardiomyopathy, Congenital Heart Disease, Long QT Syndrome, Ventricular Fibrillation, Ventricular Tachycardia
Conditions
Keywords
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator, Ventricular Arrhythmia, Sudden Cardiac Death, Congenital Heart Disease, Pediatric Electrophysiology
Brief summary
This is a randomized, prospective clinical trial comparing 2 different types of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads in children and patients with congenital heart disease. ICD lead survival in this patient group is particularly suboptimal, and lead extraction is technically difficult and carries a substantial morbidity risk. Recently, improved ICD lead designs have been released and are currently being utilized in patients. The main aim of the study is to determine if either type of lead performs better in terms of implantation electrical characteristics, long-term survival without breaking, and ease of extractability.
Detailed description
The recognition that ICD therapy in children can be life-saving, as well as the development of smaller devices and leads, are resulting in increased ICD implantation in the pediatric and young adult populations. However, ICD lead survival in this patient group is suboptimal. Lead extraction is technically difficult and has substantial morbidity. Recently, improved ICD lead designs have been released and are currently being utilized. While the development of transvenous ICD leads has allowed for less invasive implantation, the long-term presence of these leads carries some risks. When a lead becomes infected or causes patient morbidity, it must be removed. Because of the larger caliber of ICD leads and the presence of uninsulated shocking coils, non-functional ICD leads usually warrant removal to avoid future mechanical or electrical lead interactions. The larger size of ICD leads is of concern in this younger population, particularly with regard to avoiding the accumulation of implanted hardware. The principal indication for lead revision in children and young adults is lead malfunction, commonly related to patient growth and increased physical activity in this younger population. The removal of chronic indwelling pacer or ICD leads is not trivial. Scar tissue begins to bind transvenous leads to the endothelial surface several weeks after implantation, and this fibrous adherence progresses over time, exacerbated by high-energy shock delivery. In children and younger adult ICD recipients, exuberant lead scarring is prevalent, particularly in the regions of venous entry, high voltage shocking coils, and the lead tip. Transvenous lead extraction has been facilitated by the use of telescoping sheaths and powered sheaths that can be advanced over the lead to disrupt scar tissue and free the lead from the endothelium. The 2 ICD lead types to be compared (thin ICD leads versus ePTFE-coated leads) in the proposed study are at clinical equipoise. Both types are believed to be improved over prior generation ICD leads. However, a direct comparison has not been performed. As the pediatric and congenital heart disease patient subgroup is younger than the average ICD patient population, they will have greater likelihood of long-term survival, and therefore, the issues of lead survival, durability, and extractability are critically important. While these themes are important for all ICD patients, they are particularly germane for younger patients who have more active lifestyles and are, in general, expected to outlive their ICD leads. This study will prospectively assess the improvements in ICD lead design, specifically comparing a Gore ePTFE coating and thinner caliber ICD leads in pediatric and congenital heart disease population. Specific Aim #1: To prospectively evaluate the long-term performance of modern-generation ICD leads in pediatric and congenital heart disease patients. Specific Aim #2: To determine the potential beneficial effects of two improvements in ICD lead design - Gore ePTFE coil coating and thinner lead diameter in pediatric and congenital heart disease patients. Specific Aim #3: To directly compare the safety and efficacy of these new ICD lead technologies in terms of extractability in pediatric and congenital heart disease patients. The primary hypothesis is that improved lead designs and smaller diameter leads will demonstrate benefit in survival and extractability. The primary outcome variables will include: a) ICD lead functionality and performance by subtype, b) inappropriate shocks due to lead issues, c) lead extractability by subtype (Gore-coated versus thin leads). Secondary outcomes include comparison of implant electrical parameters, patient morbidity and mortality, comparing each new lead type with each other and against historical pediatric controls with standard transvenous ICD leads.
Interventions
Randomization of ICD lead type at implant
Thin (less than or equal to 7 French introducer) isodiametric ICD leads
Sponsors
Study design
Masking description
Open label
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Patients will be eligible for study enrollment at the time of implantation of a new ICD and transvenous ICD lead. * All patients under the age of 21 years at the time of initial ICD implantation, or those patients with congenital heart disease and an indication for ICD implantation are eligible for participation.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients who have existing ICD leads in place. * Patients with expected survival less than 1 year. * Patients who cannot be expected to participate in follow-up visits. * Patients receiving an epicardial or subcutaneous ICD (without transvenous ICD lead).
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| ICD Lead Functionality and Performance by Subtype | 5 years | Lead survival |
| Compare Ease of Lead Extractability by Subtype | 5 years | Extraction techniques include simple traction (no locking stylet or sheath) and advanced extraction (locking stylet with a sheath). Compared number of extractions using each technique for single and ePTFE-coated coils. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Patients With Major Complications | 5 years | Major complications experienced by patients undergoing lead extraction. |
| Comparison of Inappropriate Shocks | 5 years | Comparison of inappropriate shocks between thin leads and PTFE-coated leads. |
Countries
United States
Contacts
Boston Children's Hospital
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Thin Leads Thin (less than or equal to 7 French introducer) isodiametric ICD leads
Thin leads: Thin (less than or equal to 7 French introducer) isodiametric ICD leads | 525 |
| Gore PTFE-coated ICD lead with PTFE-coated coils
ICD lead implant: Randomization of ICD lead type at implant | 223 |
| Total | 748 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Gore PTFE-coated | Total | Thin Leads |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 112 Participants | 496 Participants | 384 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 111 Participants | 252 Participants | 141 Participants |
| Age, Continuous | 18.8 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.6 | 18.6 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.8 | 17.9 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.6 |
| Race and Ethnicity Not Collected | — | 0 Participants | — |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 223 participants | 748 participants | 525 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 103 Participants | 348 Participants | 245 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 120 Participants | 400 Participants | 280 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 525 | 0 / 223 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 39 / 525 | 14 / 223 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 5 / 525 | 1 / 223 |
Outcome results
Compare Ease of Lead Extractability by Subtype
Extraction techniques include simple traction (no locking stylet or sheath) and advanced extraction (locking stylet with a sheath). Compared number of extractions using each technique for single and ePTFE-coated coils.
Time frame: 5 years
Population: Intent to compare the ease of extraction of isodiametric ICD leads versus ICD leads with PTFE-coated coils.
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Thin Leads | Compare Ease of Lead Extractability by Subtype | 53 Participants |
| Gore PTFE-coated | Compare Ease of Lead Extractability by Subtype | 12 Participants |
ICD Lead Functionality and Performance by Subtype
Lead survival
Time frame: 5 years
Population: Intent to compare the survival of thin leads versus PTFE-coated coils.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Thin Leads | ICD Lead Functionality and Performance by Subtype | 55 percentage of leads to 5 years |
| Gore PTFE-coated | ICD Lead Functionality and Performance by Subtype | 92 percentage of leads to 5 years |
Comparison of Inappropriate Shocks
Comparison of inappropriate shocks between thin leads and PTFE-coated leads.
Time frame: 5 years
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Thin Leads | Comparison of Inappropriate Shocks | 33 Participants |
| Gore PTFE-coated | Comparison of Inappropriate Shocks | 13 Participants |
Number of Patients With Major Complications
Major complications experienced by patients undergoing lead extraction.
Time frame: 5 years
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Thin Leads | Number of Patients With Major Complications | 3 Participants |
| Gore PTFE-coated | Number of Patients With Major Complications | 3 Participants |