No benefit of a dual coil over a single coil ICD lead: evidence from the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial.

BACKGROUND: Dual coil implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads with a superior vena cava (SVC) electrode have been considered standard of care despite sparse data suggesting improved ICD defibrillation efficacy. SVC coils increase lead complexity, cost, risk of lead failure, and lead removal. OBJECTIVE: To compare all-cause mortality, sudden cardiac death, implant defibrillation threshold (DFT) test energies, appropriate shock rates, and first shock efficacy for ventricular tachyarrhythmias for dual coil vs single coil leads in the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT). METHODS: In SCD-HeFT, 811 patients with heart failure received a single lead transvenous ICD (Medtronic model 7223) and underwent protocol-driven DFT testing. The selection of a dual vs single coil right ventricular (RV) lead was at the physician's discretion. DFT data were available in 717 patients. RESULTS: Dual coil leads were used in 563 and single coil in 246 patients. After 45.5-month follow-up, overall mortality was similar (19.4% for dual coil vs 21.5% for single coil; adjusted hazard ratio 0.95; 95% confidence interval 0.68-1.34; P = .78). Sudden cardiac death was also similar (3.6% for dual coil vs 3.7% for single coil; P = .96). First shock efficacy was 82.2% vs 91.9% (dual coil vs single coil; unadjusted odds ratio 0.41; 95% confidence interval 0.15-1.13; P = .085). Mean DFT was 12.1 ± 4.7 J vs 12.8 ± 4.8 J (dual coil vs single coil; P = .087). CONCLUSIONS: In the SCD-HeFT, the addition of an SVC coil for left-sided implants was not associated with improved outcome measures. We advocate returning to single coil RV ICD leads as the standard of care to decrease chronic lead complications.

Duke Scholars

Author Manesh Raman Patel Medicine, Cardiology

Author Daniel Benjamin Mark Medicine, Cardiology

Author Kerry L. Lee Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Division of Biostatistics