User Manual
Table Of Contents
- 1. General
- 1.1 System Description
- 1.2 Indications and Usage
- 1.3 Contraindications
- 1.4 Warnings and Precautions
- 1.4.1 Sterilization, Storage, and Handling
- 1.4.2 Device Implantation and Programming
- 1.4.3 Lead Evaluation and Connection
- 1.4.4 Follow-up Testing
- 1.4.5 Pulse Generator Explant and Disposal
- 1.4.6 Hospital and Medical Hazards
- 1.4.7 Home and Occupational Hazards
- 1.4.8 Cellular Phones
- 1.4.9 Electronic Article Surveillance (EAS)
- 1.4.10 Home Appliances
- 1.4.11 Home Monitoring®
- 1.5 Potential/Observed Effects of the Device on Health
- 1.6 Clinical Studies
- 1.6.1 Kronos LVT Study
- 1.6.2 Tupos LV/ATx Study
- 1.6.2.1 Study Overview
- 1.6.2.2 Methods
- 1.6.2.3 Summary of Clinical Results
- 1.6.2.4 Primary Endpoint 1: Six Minute Walk Test & QOL (Effectiveness)
- 1.6.2.5 Effectiveness Endpoint Analysis and Conclusions
- 1.6.2.6 Primary Endpoint 2: Complication-Free Rate (Safety)
- 1.6.2.7 Primary Safety Enpoint Analysis and Conclusions
- 1.6.2.8 Post-hoc Safety Analysis
- 1.6.2.9 Post hoc Safety Analysis Conclusion
- 1.6.2.10 Secondary Endpoint Results
- 1.6.2.11 Multi-site Poolability and Gender Analysis
- 1.6.2.12 Conclusions
- 1.6.3 Lumax HFT VV Clinical Study
- 1.6.4 TRUST Clinical Study
- 1.6.5 Deikos A+
- 1.7 Patient Selection and Treatment
- 1.8 Patient Counseling Information
- 1.9 Evaluating Prospective CRTD/ICD Patients
- 2. Device Features
- 2.1 SafeSync Telemetry
- 2.2 Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT)
- 2.3 Sensing (Automatic Sensitivity Control)
- 2.4 Automatic Threshold Measurement (ATM)
- 2.5 Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia Detection
- 2.6 Tachyarrhythmia Redetection
- 2.7 Tachyarrhythmia Termination
- 2.8 Tachyarrhythmia Therapy
- 2.9 Bradycardia Therapy
- 2.9.1 Bradycardia Pacing Modes
- 2.9.2 Basic Rate
- 2.9.3 Night Rate
- 2.9.4 Rate Hysteresis
- 2.9.5 Dynamic AV Delay
- 2.9.6 IOPT
- 2.9.7 Upper Tracking Rate
- 2.9.8 Mode Switching
- 2.9.9 PMT Management
- 2.9.10 VES Discrimination after Atrial Sensed Events
- 2.9.11 Rate-Adaptive Pacing
- 2.9.12 Pulse Amplitude
- 2.9.13 Pulse Width
- 2.9.14 Post Ventricular Atrial Refractory Period
- 2.9.15 PVARP after VES
- 2.9.16 Auto PVARP
- 2.9.17 Noise Response
- 2.9.18 Post Shock Pacing
- 2.10 EP Test Functions
- 2.11 Special Features
- 2.10.2.3 Transmitting Data
- 2.11.3.3 Types of Report Transmissions
- 2.11.3.4 Description of Transmitted Data
- 2.11.3.5 IEGM Online HDs
- 2.11.3.6 Scheduling Remote Follow-up
- 2.11.4 Real-time IEGM Transmission
- 2.11.5 Capacitor Reforming
- 2.11.6 Patient and Implant Data
- 2.11.7 System Status
- 2.11.8 HF Monitor Statistics
- 2.11.9 Holter Memory
- 2.11.10 Timing Statistics
- 2.11.11 Atrial Arrhythmias
- 2.11.12 Ventricular Arrhythmias
- 2.11.13 Sensor
- 2.11.14 Sensing
- 2.11.15 Impedances
- 2.11.16 Automatic Threshold
- 2.11.17 Asynchronous Pacing Modes
- 2.11.18 Far-Field IEGM for Threshold Testing (Leadless ECG)
- 2.11.19 Advanced AT/AF Diagnostics (Lumax 700/740 only)
- 2.11.20 Atrial NIPS (Lumax 700/740 & 600/640 only)
- 3. Sterilization and Storage
- 4. Implant Procedure
- 5. Follow-up Procedures
- 6. Technical Specifications
Lumax Technical Manual 33
Patient Accountability
After randomization and enrollment, 7 patients (4 in the study
group and 3 in the control group) did not receive an implant. The
reasons for patients not receiving an implant are outlined in
Figure 4
.
Enrolled and Randomized
Patients
Study 133
Control 67
No implant Attempted
Withdrawal of Consent
Study 2
Control 1
Not Meeting Inclusion Criteria
Study 1
Control 1
Implant Attempted
Study 130
Control 65
Unsuccessful implant
Withdrawal of IC before 2nd Attempt
Study 1
Control 0
Expired before Second Attempt
Study 0
Control 1
Successful implant
Study 129
Control 64
6-Month Follow-up Data
Patient Death before 6-Month
Study 7
Control 3
Withdrawal before 6-Month
Study 1
Control 2
Not Reached 6-Month FU
or Data Pending
Study 21
Control 10
Patients completed 6-Month
Follow-up
Study 100
Control 49
Figure 4: Patient Accountability
Overall Results
There were 192 endocardial and 19 epicardial leads
implanted in 193 patients. Investigators were allowed to
choose among any legally marketed LV lead according to
familiarity with the lead and patient anatomy. The
Tupos LV/ATx CRT-D was implanted with 7 endocardial
and 4 epicardial lead models from 6 different
manufacturers. There were no adverse events reported
attributable to lead-generator incompatibility.