Comparison of lead failure manifestation of Biotronik Linox with St. Jude Medical Riata and Medtronic Sprint Fidelis lead.

Lam, Anna; Bühler, Stefan Andreas; Goulouti, Eleni; Sweda, Romy; Haeberlin, Andreas; Medeiros Domingo, Argelia; Servatius, Helge Simon; Seiler, Jens; Baldinger, Samuel Hannes; Noti, Fabian; Tanner, Hildegard; Roten, Laurent (2019). Comparison of lead failure manifestation of Biotronik Linox with St. Jude Medical Riata and Medtronic Sprint Fidelis lead. Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology, 54(2), pp. 161-170. Springer 10.1007/s10840-018-0486-0

Lam2019_Article_ComparisonOfLeadFailureManifes.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Publisher holds Copyright.

Download (499kB) | Preview


To compare lead failure manifestation and lead performance of the Biotronik Linox/Sorin Vigila defibrillator lead (Linox group) with the St. Jude Medical Riata/Riata ST (Riata group) and Medtronic Sprint Fidelis defibrillator leads (Fidelis group).


We assessed the performance of all aforementioned leads implanted at our center and investigated the manifestation of lead failures.


Of 93 Linox, 86 Riata, and 81 Fidelis leads implanted at our center, 11 (12%), 22 (26%), and 25 (31%) leads failed during a median follow-up of 46, 61, and 84 months, respectively. Inappropriate shocks were delivered in 64% (Linox), 5% (Riata), and 32% (Fidelis) of lead failures; a device alert was noted in none (Linox), 5% (Riata), and 52% (Fidelis); and lead failure was a coincidental finding in 36% (Linox), 91% (Riata), and 16% (Fidelis) of cases (p < 0.001). Non-physiological high rate signals were observed in 73% (Linox), 27% (Riata), and 80% (Fidelis) of lead failures (p = 0.001) and damaged lead integrity was found in 36% (Linox), 73% (Riata), and 24% (Fidelis) of cases (p = 0.064). Lead survival at 5 years was 88%, 92%, and 71% for Linox, Riata, and Fidelis group, respectively.


The most frequent clinical manifestation of lead failure was inappropriate shocks for Linox, coincidental finding for Riata and device alert for Fidelis leads. Non-physiological high rate signals were frequently observed in Linox and Fidelis lead failures whereas in Riata lead failures, a damaged lead integrity was the predominant finding.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)


04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Cardiovascular Disorders (DHGE) > Clinic of Cardiology
10 Strategic Research Centers > ARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research > ARTORG Center - Cardiovascular Engineering (CVE) > ARTORG Center - Cardiovascular Engineering (Heart)

UniBE Contributor:

Lam, Anna, Bühler, Stefan Andreas, Goulouti, Eleni, Sweda, Romy, Häberlin, Andreas David Heinrich, Medeiros Domingo, Argelia, Servatius, Helge Simon (A), Seiler, Jens, Baldinger, Samuel Hannes, Noti, Fabian, Tanner, Hildegard, Roten, Laurent


600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health








Hildegard Tanner

Date Deposited:

25 Apr 2019 08:55

Last Modified:

29 Mar 2023 23:36

Publisher DOI:


PubMed ID:


Uncontrolled Keywords:

Defibrillator lead Lead failure Linox Riata Sprint fidelis




Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback