French Attitude Registry in Case of ICD Lead Replacement
NCT ID: NCT01829269
Last Updated: 2019-08-07
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
559 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2013-04-30
2019-05-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
There are no standardized approach for replacing defibrillation lead. A record made in the United States showed significant differences according to the teams strategy in case of failure of defibrillation lead in particular with regard to the decision to explant or abandon the probe.
The risk of extracting a defibrillation lead are well known with a major complication rate of 1.6 to 1.95%.
Regarding the risk of complications related to the abandonment of a probe we have less data. For some there is no risk to abandon a defibrillation lead. But others reported a complication rate of 5.5% related to pacing discontinued.
Main objective: Collect the attitude of different centers and different operators when replacing a failed defibrillation lead or "at risk." Explantation or abandonment of the sensor replaced.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Failure of Chronically Implanted Defibrillator Leads -Incidence and Management
NCT00614718
Defibrillation Testing During Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) Replacement
NCT04206371
Wearable Then Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator After Myocardial Infarction
NCT05123885
Septal - Success Rate and Clinical Outcome of Septal Implant of Ventricular Defibrillation Lead
NCT00180297
Evaluation of the " Tele-follow-up " for the Follow-up of Implantable Defibrillators
NCT00598026
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Patients with a defibrillator
The study population is that of patients with a defibrillator to have a change of probe.
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Patient who agreed to participate in the study
* Patients aged 18 years and over
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
French Cardiology Society
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Clinique Ambroise Paré
Neuilly-sur-Seine, , France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Goette A, Cantu F, van Erven L, Geelen P, Halimi F, Merino JL, Morgan JM; Scientific Initiative Committee of the European Heart Rhythm Association. Performance and survival of transvenous defibrillation leads: need for a European data registry. Europace. 2009 Jan;11(1):31-4. doi: 10.1093/europace/eun301. Epub 2008 Nov 11.
Wilkoff BL, Love CJ, Byrd CL, Bongiorni MG, Carrillo RG, Crossley GH 3rd, Epstein LM, Friedman RA, Kennergren CE, Mitkowski P, Schaerf RH, Wazni OM; Heart Rhythm Society; American Heart Association. Transvenous lead extraction: Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus on facilities, training, indications, and patient management: this document was endorsed by the American Heart Association (AHA). Heart Rhythm. 2009 Jul;6(7):1085-104. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2009.05.020. Epub 2009 May 22. No abstract available.
Xu W, Moore HJ, Karasik PE, Franz MR, Singh SN, Fletcher RD. Management strategies when implanted cardioverter defibrillator leads fail: survey findings. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2009 Sep;32(9):1130-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2009.02454.x.
Rickard J, Wilkoff BL. Extraction of implantable cardiac electronic devices. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2011 Oct;13(5):407-14. doi: 10.1007/s11886-011-0198-x.
Wilkoff BL, Byrd CL, Love CJ, Hayes DL, Sellers TD, Schaerf R, Parsonnet V, Epstein LM, Sorrentino RA, Reiser C. Pacemaker lead extraction with the laser sheath: results of the pacing lead extraction with the excimer sheath (PLEXES) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 May;33(6):1671-6. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(99)00074-1.
Glikson M, Suleiman M, Luria DM, Martin ML, Hodge DO, Shen WK, Bradley DJ, Munger TM, Rea RF, Hayes DL, Hammill SC, Friedman PA. Do abandoned leads pose risk to implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients? Heart Rhythm. 2009 Jan;6(1):65-8. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2008.10.012. Epub 2008 Oct 11.
Suga C, Hayes DL, Hyberger LK, Lloyd MA. Is there an adverse outcome from abandoned pacing leads? J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2000 Oct;4(3):493-9. doi: 10.1023/a:1009860514724.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
Related Info
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
12 759
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.