Evidence Hub

Epicardial placement of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in adults: Technical considerations, system performance, and clinical outcomes

Shivamurthy P, Cevasco M, Supple GE, Hanumanthu BK, Markman TM, Guandalini G, Hyman MC, Enriquez A et al.

Heart rhythm, 2025

14 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surgical implantation of epicardial implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is considered when transvenous ICD placement is not feasible because of congenital anomalies, venous obstruction, or prior infections. Epicardial pacemakers are well-studied but less is known about contemporary epicardial ICD systems in adults.

OBJECTIVES: This case series details the indications, techniques, safety, and long-term performance of surgically implanted epicardial high voltage (HV) coils and leads in adults.

METHODS: We included all patients who received epicardial HV coils or leads at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania between 2014 and 2025.

RESULTS: Nineteen patients (14 men, median age 64 years) were identified. Indications included ICD replacement after lead extraction for endocarditis (7), placement during concomitant surgery, including for tricuspid regurgitation (6), left ventricular assist device (3), and lack of venous access (3). HV coils were used in 58%, and 42% received epicardial leads. All patients received epicardial pace-sense leads; 68% received cardiac resynchronization therapy. HV coils or leads were sewn to the epicardium: 48% on the posterior left ventricle, 16% on the anterior right ventricle, 26% on both ventricles, and 11% in the transverse sinus. Two patients had impedances > 200 Ω because of a loose set screw and a damaged connector pin, respectively. Two had impedances < 20 Ω without clinical impact. One coil fractured 1.5 years…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 14 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free