IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v64y2018i2p633-651.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic Abandon/Extract Decisions for Failed Cardiac Leads

Author

Listed:
  • Anahita Khojandi

    (Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996)

  • Lisa M. Maillart

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261)

  • Oleg A. Prokopyev

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261)

  • Mark S. Roberts

    (Department of Health Policy and Management, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261)

  • Samir F. Saba

    (Heart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213)

Abstract

When a cardiac lead fails, physicians implant a new lead and may opt to extract the failed lead and/or any previously abandoned leads. Because the risk of extraction increases in lead age, physicians may extract leads to reduce the future risk of mandatory extraction, due to either infection or limited space in the vein. We develop discrete-time semi-Markov decision process models for various types of cardiac devices to determine patient-specific, lifetime-maximizing extraction policies as a function of patient age and the age of every implanted lead. We use clinical data to calibrate these models and present insightful numerical results, including comparisons to policies commonly used in practice. Our numerical experiments suggest that extracting failed leads only when forced to because of space limitations is usually a good rule of thumb, but that following the optimal policy, as opposed to the commonly used heuristic policies, can extend an average patient’s expected lifetime by up to 1.2 years and decrease the likelihood of device-related death by up to 94% in some cases. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2621 . This paper was accepted by Noah Gans, stochastic models and simulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Anahita Khojandi & Lisa M. Maillart & Oleg A. Prokopyev & Mark S. Roberts & Samir F. Saba, 2018. "Dynamic Abandon/Extract Decisions for Failed Cardiac Leads," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 633-651, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:64:y:2018:i:2:p:633-651
    DOI: mnsc.2016.2621
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/mnsc.2016.2621
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/mnsc.2016.2621?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robin P. Nicolai & Rommert Dekker, 2008. "Optimal Maintenance of Multi-component Systems: A Review," Springer Series in Reliability Engineering, in: Complex System Maintenance Handbook, chapter 11, pages 263-286, Springer.
    2. Pham, Hoang & Wang, Hongzhou, 1996. "Imperfect maintenance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 425-438, November.
    3. Wang, Hongzhou, 2002. "A survey of maintenance policies of deteriorating systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(3), pages 469-489, June.
    4. Ding, Fangfang & Tian, Zhigang, 2012. "Opportunistic maintenance for wind farms considering multi-level imperfect maintenance thresholds," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 175-182.
    5. Van Horenbeek, Adriaan & Pintelon, Liliane, 2013. "A dynamic predictive maintenance policy for complex multi-component systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 39-50.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jingyi Zhao & Chunhai Gao & Tao Tang, 2022. "A Review of Sustainable Maintenance Strategies for Single Component and Multicomponent Equipment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Lu, Biao & Zhou, Xiaojun, 2017. "Opportunistic preventive maintenance scheduling for serial-parallel multistage manufacturing systems with multiple streams of deterioration," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 116-127.
    3. Alaswad, Suzan & Xiang, Yisha, 2017. "A review on condition-based maintenance optimization models for stochastically deteriorating system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 54-63.
    4. Nguyen, Kim-Anh & Do, Phuc & Grall, Antoine, 2017. "Joint predictive maintenance and inventory strategy for multi-component systems using Birnbaum’s structural importance," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 249-261.
    5. Zhu, Wenjin & Fouladirad, Mitra & Bérenguer, Christophe, 2016. "A multi-level maintenance policy for a multi-component and multifailure mode system with two independent failure modes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 50-63.
    6. Zhang, Xiaohong & Zeng, Jianchao, 2017. "Joint optimization of condition-based opportunistic maintenance and spare parts provisioning policy in multiunit systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 479-498.
    7. Shafiee, Mahmood & Chukova, Stefanka, 2013. "Maintenance models in warranty: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(3), pages 561-572.
    8. Wang, Ling & Chu, Jian & Mao, Weijie, 2009. "A condition-based replacement and spare provisioning policy for deteriorating systems with uncertain deterioration to failure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 184-205, April.
    9. Sedghi, Mahdieh & Kauppila, Osmo & Bergquist, Bjarne & Vanhatalo, Erik & Kulahci, Murat, 2021. "A taxonomy of railway track maintenance planning and scheduling: A review and research trends," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    10. Urbani, Michele & Brunelli, Matteo & Punkka, Antti, 2023. "An approach for bi-objective maintenance scheduling on a networked system with limited resources," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(1), pages 101-113.
    11. de Jonge, Bram & Scarf, Philip A., 2020. "A review on maintenance optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 805-824.
    12. Vu, Hai Canh & Do, Phuc & Barros, Anne & Bérenguer, Christophe, 2014. "Maintenance grouping strategy for multi-component systems with dynamic contexts," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 233-249.
    13. Vu, Hai Canh & Do, Phuc & Fouladirad, Mitra & Grall, Antoine, 2020. "Dynamic opportunistic maintenance planning for multi-component redundant systems with various types of opportunities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    14. de Jonge, Bram & Klingenberg, Warse & Teunter, Ruud & Tinga, Tiedo, 2016. "Reducing costs by clustering maintenance activities for multiple critical units," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 93-103.
    15. Nguyen, Kim-Anh & Do, Phuc & Grall, Antoine, 2015. "Multi-level predictive maintenance for multi-component systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 83-94.
    16. Olde Keizer, Minou C.A. & Flapper, Simme Douwe P. & Teunter, Ruud H., 2017. "Condition-based maintenance policies for systems with multiple dependent components: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 405-420.
    17. Van Horenbeek, Adriaan & Buré, Jasmine & Cattrysse, Dirk & Pintelon, Liliane & Vansteenwegen, Pieter, 2013. "Joint maintenance and inventory optimization systems: A review," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(2), pages 499-508.
    18. Kowalski, Marcin & Magott, Jan & Nowakowski, Tomasz & Werbińska-Wojciechowska, Sylwia, 2014. "Exact and approximation methods for dependability assessment of tram systems with time window," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 671-686.
    19. Erguido, A. & Crespo Márquez, A. & Castellano, E. & Gómez Fernández, J.F., 2017. "A dynamic opportunistic maintenance model to maximize energy-based availability while reducing the life cycle cost of wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 843-856.
    20. Özgür-Ünlüakın, Demet & Türkali, Busenur & Karacaörenli, Ayşe & Çağlar Aksezer, S., 2019. "A DBN based reactive maintenance model for a complex system in thermal power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 1-1.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:64:y:2018:i:2:p:633-651. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.