Multi‐Center, Community‐Based Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Registry: Population, Device Utilization, and Outcomes
Open Access
- 9 March 2016
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Journal of the American Heart Association
- Vol. 5 (3) , e002798
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this study is to describe key elements, clinical outcomes, and potential uses of the Kaiser Permanente–Cardiac Device Registry. Methods and Results: This is a cohort study of implantable cardioverter defibrillators ( ICD ), pacemakers ( PM ), and cardiac resynchronization therapy ( CRT ) devices implanted between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2013 by ≈400 physicians in 6 US geographical regions. Registry data variables, including patient characteristics, comorbidities, indication for procedures, complications, and revisions, were captured using the healthcare system's electronic medical record. Outcomes were identified using electronic screening algorithms and adjudicated via chart review. There were 11 924 ICD s, 33 519 PM s, 4472 CRT s, and 66 067 leads registered. A higher proportion of devices were implanted in males: 75.1% ( ICD ), 55.0% ( PM ), and 66.7% ( CRT ), with mean patient age 63.2 years ( ICD ), 75.2 ( PM ), and 67.2 ( CRT ). The 30‐day postoperative incidence of tamponade, hematoma, and pneumothorax were ≤0.3% ( ICD ), ≤0.6% ( PM ), and ≤0.4% ( CRT ). Device failures requiring revision occurred at a rate of 2.17% for ICD s, 0.85% for PM s, and 4.93% for CRT s, per 100 patient observation years. Superficial infection rates were <0.03% for all devices; deep infection rates were 0.6% ( ICD ), 0.5% ( PM ), and 1.0% ( CRT ). Results were used to monitor vendor‐specific variations and were systematically shared with individual regions to address potential variations in outcomes, utilization, and to assist with the management of device recalls. Conclusions: The Kaiser Permanente–Cardiac Device Registry is a robust tool to monitor postprocedural patient outcomes and postmarket surveillance of implants and potentially change practice patterns.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Association of Single- vs Dual-Chamber ICDs With Mortality, Readmissions, and Complications Among Patients Receiving an ICD for Primary PreventionJAMA, 2013
- 2012 ACCF/AHA/HRS Focused Update Incorporated Into the ACCF/AHA/HRS 2008 Guidelines for Device-Based Therapy of Cardiac Rhythm AbnormalitiesCirculation, 2013
- Trends in Permanent Pacemaker Implantation in the United States From 1993 to 2009JACC, 2012
- Postmarketing Surveillance of Medical Devices — Filling in the GapsNew England Journal of Medicine, 2012
- The 11th World Survey of Cardiac Pacing and Implantable Cardioverter‐Defibrillators: Calendar Year 2009–A World Society of Arrhythmia's ProjectPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2011
- Non–Evidence-Based ICD Implantations in the United StatesJAMA, 2011
- Complication Rates Associated With Pacemaker or Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Generator Replacements and Upgrade ProceduresCirculation, 2010
- Recurrent Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Replacement Is Associated with an Increasing Risk of Pocket-Related ComplicationsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2010
- Cardiac Device Implantation in the United States from 1997 through 2004: A Population-based AnalysisJournal of General Internal Medicine, 2007
- Sex-Based Differences in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator TherapiesCardiology in Review, 2006