Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Clin Res Cardiol. 2012 Apr;101(4):239-45. doi: 10.1007/s00392-011-0407-z. Epub 2012 Jan 10.

Dual- versus single-coil implantable defibrillator leads: review of the literature.

Author information

  • 1Medizinische Klinik II, Klinikum Kassel, Kassel, Germany. neuzner@klinikum-kassel.de

Abstract

The preferred use of dual-coil implantable defibrillator lead systems in current implantable defibrillator therapy is likely based on data showing statistically lower defibrillation thresholds with dual-coil defibrillator lead systems. The following review will summarize the clinical data for dual- versus single-coil defibrillator leads in the left and right pectoral implant locations, and will then discuss the clinical implications of single- versus dual-coil usage for atrial defibrillation, venous complications, and the risks associated with lead extraction. It will be noted that there are no comparative clinical studies on the use and outcomes of single- versus dual-coil lead systems in implantable defibrillator therapy over a long-term follow-up. The limited long-term reliability of defibrillator leads is a major concern in implantable defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy. A simpler single-coil defibrillator lead system may improve the long-term performance of implanted leads. Furthermore, the superior vena cava coil is suspected to increase interventional risk in transvenous lead extraction. Therefore, the need for objective data on extractions and complications will be emphasized.

PMID:
22231644
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Springer
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk