A systematic review of acute and long-term outcomes in patients with non-transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

BACKGROUND: Non-transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) systems have been developed to address limitations of transvenous ICDs. This systematic literature review aimed to summarize periprocedural and long-term outcomes of non-transvenous ICD systems in adult patients with guideline-based indications for ICD therapy. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420261327618). Eligible studies enrolled adults (≥18 years) receiving a non-transvenous ICD for primary or secondary prevention. Outcomes included periprocedural and long-term endpoints and were summarized descriptively. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for case series were used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: ≥ 100). Periprocedural complications were reported in 0%-5% of patients in most studies. Long-term complication rates ranged from 0%-8% at 0.5-1.5 years of follow-up and 1%-14% beyond 1.5 years. All-cause mortality ranged from 1%-5% within 6 months and increased to 16%-26% at 4-8 years. Clinical defibrillation success was consistently high (95%-100%). Incidence of inappropriate shock generally ranged from 7%-13% at 1 year and 2%-18% at later timepoints. Appropriate shock incidence ranged from 2% to 9% within 1 year and increased with longer follow-up. Risk of bias was predominantly moderate, with limited variation using NOS and greater discrimination observed with JBI. CONCLUSIONS: Non-transvenous ICD systems demonstrate favorable safety and effectiveness profiles, with high procedural and defibrillation success and acceptable complication and inappropriate shock rates across studies. Overall, the available evidence supports their use in appropriately selected adult patients with standard ICD indications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Medical Economics
Published
2026-05-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2026.2667706
Primary Topic
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A systematic review of acute and long-term outcomes in patients with non-transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

Reece Holbrook, Sunil Kapur, Steven Zweibel, David Lanctin
Journal of Medical Economics
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
article

A systematic review of acute and long-term outcomes in patients with non-transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

Reece Holbrook, Sunil Kapur, Steven Zweibel, David Lanctin
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Non-transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) systems have been developed to address limitations of transvenous ICDs. This systematic literature review aimed to summarize periprocedural and long-term outcomes of non-transvenous ICD systems in adult patients with guideline-based indications for ICD therapy. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420261327618). Eligible studies enrolled adults (≥18 years) receiving a non-transvenous ICD for primary or secondary prevention. Outcomes included periprocedural and long-term endpoints and were summarized descriptively. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for case series were used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: ≥ 100). Periprocedural complications were reported in 0%-5% of patients in most studies. Long-term complication rates ranged from 0%-8% at 0.5-1.5 years of follow-up and 1%-14% beyond 1.5 years. All-cause mortality ranged from 1%-5% within 6 months and increased to 16%-26% at 4-8 years. Clinical defibrillation success was consistently high (95%-100%). Incidence of inappropriate shock generally ranged from 7%-13% at 1 year and 2%-18% at later timepoints. Appropriate shock incidence ranged from 2% to 9% within 1 year and increased with longer follow-up. Risk of bias was predominantly moderate, with limited variation using NOS and greater discrimination observed with JBI. CONCLUSIONS: Non-transvenous ICD systems demonstrate favorable safety and effectiveness profiles, with high procedural and defibrillation success and acceptable complication and inappropriate shock rates across studies. Overall, the available evidence supports their use in appropriately selected adult patients with standard ICD indications.

Journal of Medical EconomicsVol. 29(1)
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US), Medtronic (Ireland) (IE), Alaska Heart and Vascular Institute (US)
Medtronic
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.