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 47
Table 18: Peak VO2 Testing Results – Patients with RER
1
Results Study Control
Peak VO
2
(ml/kg/min)
N=32
Baseline:
Mean:
13.46 ± 0.57
Range:
6.9 to 21.1
Six-Month:
Mean:
13.39 ± 0.53
Range:
7.6 to 20.70
Difference:
Mean:
-0.06 ± 0.42
Range:
-7.9 to 4.9
N=10
Baseline:
Mean:
12.58 ± 0.75
Range:
8.0 to 14.8
Six-Month:
Mean:
12.89 ± 0.94
Range:
7.0 to 17.2
Difference:
Mean:
0.31 ± 0.67
Range:
-2.7 to 4.6
1.6.2.11 Multi-site Poolability and Gender Analysis
The OPTION CRT/ATx clinical report includes data from multiple
centers with centralized coordination, data processing, and
reporting at BIOTRONIK. All of the clinical centers followed the
requirements of an identical clinical protocol, and all of the clinical
centers used the same methods to collect and report the clinical
data. In order to justify pooling of the data from multiple centers,
several analyses were completed. All of the centers were divided
into two groups based on implant volume. Comparisons were
then made between the patient populations based on the results
of each of the endpoints. Additionally, analyses were performed
on the data collected in the OPTION CRT/ATx clinical
investigation in order to compare results between males and
females. The first type of analysis compared enrollment by patient
gender in each of the study and control groups. The second type
of analysis compared effectiveness outcomes in each gender.
The results of these analyses demonstrate poolability of the data
between sites. There were no significant differences in the
second primary endpoint or any of the secondary endpoints
between high and low volume implant centers.