Unexpected ICD Pulse Generator Failure Due to Electronic Circuit Damage Caused by Electrical Overstress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because it is a lifesaving device, the unexpected failure of an ICD can be catastrophic. We report ICD electronic circuit failure due to electrical overstress damage (EOS) to the high voltage hybird circuit and other electronic components in a series of ICD pulse generator models. Data were obtained from the Multicenter Registry of Pacemaker and ICD Pacemaker and Lead Failures, and from the manufactures' adverse event reports, that were in the FDA's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. Of 16 nonbattery Guidant/CPI ICD pulse generator failures reported to the registry, 6 (38%) have been confirmed by the manufacturer to be EOS related, and Guidant/CPI has reported 273 such failures to the FDA as of 12/29/00. The signs of failure included loss of telemetry and inability to deliver therapy, and some patients have experienced serious adverse events. Hybrid circuit damage may have occurred during capacitor charging or reform, and the majority appears to have happened during normal ICD function. While the incidence of this problem is unknown, a management strategy should be adopted that includes routine follow-up every 3 months and device evaluation after a shock or exposure to external defibrillation or electrosurgical devices. This study suggests that additional data are needed to determine the incidence of this problem, and that our present methods for monitoring the performance of ICD's following market release are inadequate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".