1
|
Beyer SE, Harrell C, Mullane S, Kutyifa V, Madhavan M, Piccini JP, Upadhyay GA, Ip JE, Thomas G, Liu CF, Markowitz SM, Hayes D, Lerman BB, Cheung JW. Predictors of Shock-Reduction Programming and Its Impact on Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapies and Mortality: The CERTITUDE Registry. J Am Heart Assoc 2024; 13:e034500. [PMID: 39011955 DOI: 10.1161/jaha.124.034500] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2024] [Accepted: 04/15/2024] [Indexed: 07/17/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Shock-reduction implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming (SRP) was associated with fewer therapies and improved survival in randomized controlled trials, but real-world studies investigating SRP and associated outcomes are limited. METHODS AND RESULTS The BIOTRONIK CERTITUDE registry was linked with the Medicare database. We included all patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implanted between August 22, 2012 and September 30, 2021 in the United States. SRP was defined as programming to either a therapy rate cutoff ≥188 beats per minute or number of intervals to detection ≥30/40 for treatment. Among 6781 patients (mean 74±9 years; 27% women), 3393 (50%) had SRP. Older age, secondary prevention indication, and device implantation in the southern or western United States were associated with lower use of SRP. The cumulative incidence rate of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks was lower in the SRP group (5.1% shocks/patient year) compared with the non-SRP group (7.2% shocks/patient year) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.73-0.96]; P=0.005). Over a median follow-up of 2.9 years, 739 deaths occurred in the SRP group and 822 deaths occurred in the non-SRP group (adjusted HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.88-1.07]; P=0.569). SRP was associated with a lower all-cause mortality among patients without ischemic heart disease compared with patients with ischemic heart disease (adjusted HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.48-0.87] versus adjusted HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.92-1.14]; Pinteraction=0.004). CONCLUSIONS Adoption of SRP is low in real-world clinical practice. Age, clinical variables, and geographic factors are associated with use of SRP. In this study, SRP-associated decrease in mortality was limited to patients without ischemic heart disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian E Beyer
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York- Presbyterian Hospital New York NY
- Department of Electrophysiology, Heart and Diabetes Center North Rhine-Westphalia Ruhr University Bochum Bad Oeynhausen Germany
| | | | | | - Valentina Kutyifa
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine University of Rochester Medical Center Rochester NY
| | - Malini Madhavan
- Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic Rochester MN
| | - Jonathan P Piccini
- Cardiac Electrophysiology Section, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine Duke University Medical Center Durham NC
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Durham NC
- Department of Population Health Sciences Duke University Durham NC
| | - Gaurav A Upadhyay
- University of Chicago Medicine, Center for Arrhythmia Care, Pritzker School of Medicine, Section of Cardiology Chicago IL
| | - James E Ip
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York- Presbyterian Hospital New York NY
| | - George Thomas
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York- Presbyterian Hospital New York NY
| | - Christopher F Liu
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York- Presbyterian Hospital New York NY
| | - Steven M Markowitz
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York- Presbyterian Hospital New York NY
| | | | - Bruce B Lerman
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York- Presbyterian Hospital New York NY
| | - Jim W Cheung
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York- Presbyterian Hospital New York NY
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Braghieri L, Ahmed A, Curtis AB, Kim JA, Connolly AT, Nabutovsky Y, Kim G, Ganz L, Wilkoff BL. Evaluating cardiac lead safety using observational, real-world data: EP PASSION proof-of-concept study. Heart Rhythm 2024:S1547-5271(24)02819-4. [PMID: 38936445 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.06.045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2024] [Revised: 06/18/2024] [Accepted: 06/22/2024] [Indexed: 06/29/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Traditional post-approval study (PAS) designs have been accepted by regulatory authorities to fulfill postmarketing requirements for cardiac leads, but they have several limitations. OBJECTIVE We conducted a proof-of-concept study of alternative methods that use real-world data (RWD) to evaluate lead safety in large populations of patients. METHODS Abbott patient device databases were linked with Medicare Fee-For-Service (FFS) claims to identify lead complications in patients implanted with Abbott Optisure lead. A 1:1 comparison between the PAS method and RWD method of detecting mechanical lead-related complication events was conducted in 444 PAS participants who were enrolled in Medicare FFS. Agreement between methods was evaluated by McNemar test and Cohen κ. Survival free from complications at 3 years was compared between the PAS and RWD cohorts with an equivalence acceptance criterion of ±2.5%. RESULTS There were 1171 PAS patients and 5804 Medicare FFS patients who received an Optisure lead between August 27, 2014, and June 14, 2016. Patients were observed through December 31, 2018. Complete agreement was found between PAS-reported and claims-detected complications (McNemar P value = 1; Cohen κ = 1). Survival free from complications at 3 years by the RWD method was 98.4% (95% confidence limit, 98.0%-98.7%), which was within the acceptable range of the PAS 98.4% (95% confidence limit, 97.6%-99.0%). CONCLUSION These results show a close agreement between RWD-detected and PAS-reported lead complication rates, which highlights the potential benefits of RWD-based methods to enhance the generation of clinical evidence for lead safety.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Aamir Ahmed
- Department of Medicine, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.
| | - Anne B Curtis
- Department of Medicine, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| | | | | | | | - Grant Kim
- Abbott Laboratories, Sylmar, California
| | | | - Bruce L Wilkoff
- Cleveland Clinic Heart, Thoracic, and Vascular Institute, Cleveland, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Dhruva SS, Zhang S, Chen J, Noseworthy PA, Doshi AA, Agboola KM, Herrin J, Jiang G, Yu Y, Cafri G, Farr KC, Mbwana MS, Ross JS, Coplan PM, Drozda JP. Using real-world data from health systems to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a catheter to treat ischemic ventricular tachycardia. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2023; 66:1817-1825. [PMID: 36738387 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-023-01496-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2022] [Accepted: 01/25/2023] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The ThermoCool STSF catheter is used for ablation of ischemic ventricular tachycardia (VT) in routine clinical practice, although outcomes have not been studied and the catheter does not have Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for this indication. We used real-world health system data to evaluate its safety and effectiveness for this indication. METHODS Among patients undergoing ischemic VT ablation with the ThermoCool STSF catheter pooled across two health systems (Mercy Health and Mayo Clinic), the primary safety composite outcome of death, thromboembolic events, and procedural complications within 7 days was compared to a performance goal of 15%, which is twice the expected proportion of the primary composite safety outcome based on prior studies. The exploratory effectiveness outcome of rehospitalization for VT or heart failure or repeat VT ablation at up to 1 year was averaged across health systems among patients treated with the ThermoCool STSF vs. ST catheters. RESULTS Seventy total patients received ablation for ischemic VT using the ThermoCool STSF catheter. The primary safety composite outcome occurred in 3/70 (4.3%; 90% CI, 1.2-10.7%) patients, meeting the pre-specified performance goal, p = 0.0045. At 1 year, the effectiveness outcome risk difference (STSF-ST) at Mercy was - 0.4% (90% CI: - 25.2%, 24.3%) and at Mayo Clinic was 12.6% (90% CI: - 13.0%, 38.4%); the average risk difference across both institutions was 5.8% (90% CI: - 12.0, 23.7). CONCLUSIONS The ThermoCool STSF catheter was safe and appeared effective for ischemic VT ablation, supporting continued use of the catheter and informing possible FDA label expansion. Health system data hold promise for real-world safety and effectiveness evaluation of cardiovascular devices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sanket S Dhruva
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, 4150 Clement St, Building 203, 111C, San Francisco, CA, 94121, USA.
| | - Shumin Zhang
- MedTech Epidemiology and Real-World Data Sciences, Office of the Chief Medical Officer, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | | | | | | | - Kolade M Agboola
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Jeph Herrin
- Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Guoqian Jiang
- Department of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Yue Yu
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Guy Cafri
- MedTech Epidemiology and Real-World Data Sciences, Office of the Chief Medical Officer, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | | | - Mwanatumu S Mbwana
- National Evaluation System for Health Technology Coordinating Center (NESTcc), Medical Device Innovation Consortium, Arlington, VA, USA
| | - Joseph S Ross
- Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
- Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Paul M Coplan
- MedTech Epidemiology and Real-World Data Sciences, Office of the Chief Medical Officer, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Caughron H, Bowman H, Raitt MH, Whooley MA, Tarasovsky G, Shen H, Matheny ME, Selzman KA, Wang L, Major J, Odobasic H, Dhruva SS. Cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead safety: Harnessing real-world remote monitoring data for medical device evaluation. Heart Rhythm 2023; 20:512-519. [PMID: 36586706 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.12.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2022] [Revised: 12/14/2022] [Accepted: 12/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Current methods to identify cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead failure include postapproval studies, which may be limited in scope, participant numbers, and attrition; studies relying on administrative codes, which lack specificity; and voluntary adverse event reporting, which cannot determine incidence or attribution to the lead. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to determine whether adjudicated remote monitoring (RM) data can address these limitations and augment lead safety evaluation. METHODS Among 48,191 actively monitored patients with a cardiovascular implantable electronic device, we identified RM transmissions signifying incident lead abnormalities and, separately, identified all leads abandoned or extracted between April 1, 2019, and April 1, 2021. We queried electronic health record and Medicare fee-for-service claims data to determine whether patients had administrative codes for lead failure. We verified lead failure through manual electronic health record review. RESULTS Of the 48,191 patients, 1170 (2.4%) had incident lead abnormalities detected by RM. Of these, 409 patients had administrative codes for lead failure, and 233 of these 409 patients (57.0%) had structural lead failure verified through chart review. Of the 761 patients without administrative codes, 167 (21.9%) had structural lead failure verified through chart review. Thus, 400 patients with RM transmissions suggestive of lead abnormalities (34.2%) had structural lead failure. In addition, 200 patients without preceding abnormal RM transmissions had leads abandoned or extracted for structural failure, making the total lead failure cohort 600 patients (66.7% with RM abnormalities, 33.3% without). Patients with isolated right atrial or left ventricular lead failure were less likely to have lead replacement and administrative codes reflective of lead failure. CONCLUSION RM may strengthen real-world assessment of lead failure, particularly for leads where patients do not undergo replacement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hope Caughron
- Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California; Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California
| | - Hilary Bowman
- Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California
| | - Merritt H Raitt
- Knight Cardiovascular Institute, Oregon Health and Sciences University, Portland, Oregon; Portland Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Portland, Oregon
| | - Mary A Whooley
- Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California; Department of Medicine, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Gary Tarasovsky
- Department of Medicine, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Hui Shen
- Department of Medicine, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California
| | - Michael E Matheny
- Geriatrics Research, Education, and Clinical Service, Tennessee Valley Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Nashville, Tennessee; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Kimberly A Selzman
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah; Salt Lake City Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Li Wang
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Jacqueline Major
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Hetal Odobasic
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Sanket S Dhruva
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Dhruva SS, Ridgeway JL, Ross JS, Drozda, JP, Wilson NA. Exploring unique device identifier implementation and use for real-world evidence: a mixed-methods study with NESTcc health system network collaborators. BMJ SURGERY, INTERVENTIONS, & HEALTH TECHNOLOGIES 2023; 5:e000167. [PMID: 36704544 PMCID: PMC9872505 DOI: 10.1136/bmjsit-2022-000167] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2022] [Accepted: 12/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Objectives To examine the current state of unique device identifier (UDI) implementation, including barriers and facilitators, among eight health systems participating in a research network committed to real-world evidence (RWE) generation for medical devices. Design Mixed methods, including a structured survey and semistructured interviews. Setting Eight health systems participating in the National Evaluation System for health Technology research network within the USA. Participants Individuals identified as being involved in or knowledgeable about UDI implementation or medical device identification from supply chain, information technology and high-volume procedural area(s) in their health system. Main outcomes measures Interview topics were related to UDI implementation, including barriers and facilitators; UDI use; benefits of UDI adoption; and vision for UDI implementation. Data were analysed using directed content analysis, drawing on prior conceptual models of UDI implementation and the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment framework. A brief survey of health system characteristics and scope of UDI implementation was also conducted. Results Thirty-five individuals completed interviews. Three of eight health systems reported having implemented UDI. Themes identified about barriers and facilitators to UDI implementation included knowledge of the UDI and its benefits among decision-makers; organisational systems, culture and networks that support technology and workflow changes; and external factors such as policy mandates and technology. A final theme focused on the availability of UDIs for RWE; lack of availability significantly hindered RWE studies on medical devices. Conclusions UDI adoption within health systems requires knowledge of and impetus to achieve operational and clinical benefits. These are necessary to support UDI availability for medical device safety and effectiveness studies and RWE generation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sanket S. Dhruva
- Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California, USA
- San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Jennifer L Ridgeway
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, and the Division of Health Care Delivery Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Joseph S. Ross
- Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
- Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
| | | | - Natalia A Wilson
- Center for Healthcare Delivery and Policy, Arizona State University, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| |
Collapse
|