Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 9359543

Lead system optimization for transvenous defibrillation.

Abstract

Lead systems that include an active pectoral shell reduce defibrillation thresholds and permit transvenous defibrillation in nearly all patients. A further improvement in defibrillation efficacy is desirable to allow for smaller pulse generators with a reduced maximum output. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare defibrillation thresholds with multiple transvenous lead systems including those with an active pectoral shell to determine which system would optimize defibrillation energy requirements. This prospective study was performed on 21 consecutive patients. Each subject was evaluated with 3 lead configurations with the order of testing randomized. The configurations were a dual coil transvenous lead (lead), the distal right ventricular coil and pectoral pulse generator shell (unipolar), and all 3 components (triad). The right ventricular coil was the cathode for the first phase of the biphasic defibrillation waveform. Delivered energy at defibrillation threshold was 11.2 +/- 3.4 J for the lead configuration, 10.1 +/- 5.2 J for the unipolar configuration, and 7.8 +/- 3.6 J for the triad configuration (p <0.01). Leading edge voltage (p <0.01) and shock impedance (p <0.001) were also decreased for the triad configuration compared with the lead or unipolar configurations, whereas peak current was minimized with the unipolar configuration (p <0.01). We conclude that the combination of a dual coil, transvenous lead and an active pectoral shell reduces defibrillation energy requirements compared with either the lead alone or unipolar configuration. Moreover, the defibrillation thresholds were < or =15 J in all patients using the triad lead system.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M R Gold, A H Foster, S R Shorofsky. 1997-11-01. Lead system optimization for transvenous defibrillation.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(97)00633-4

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Does the rate of inappropriate therapy differ in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators from different manufacturers?

OBJECTIVE: We conducted this study to compare the rate of >/=1 inappropriate therapy between ICDs from two manufacturers which use different discriminatory protocols. METHOD: One hundred sixty two patients (mean age 58 +/- 13 years, 126 male) who received ICDs between January 2001 and 2005 were included in the study. Clinical, electrocardiographic, and ICD stored data and electrograms were collected and analyzed. Immediately after implantation all the detection and discrimination criteria were activated with the nominal values in order to compare the two discriminatory protocols under the default manufacturer's settings. RESULTS: During the follow up period of 14.3 +/- 10 months, 49 (30%) patients received >/=1 inappropriate ICD therapy. The rate of >/=1 inappropriate ICD therapy in manufacturer A and B ICDs was 26% (n = 29) and 41% (n = 20), respectively. Comparing the rate of >/=1 inappropriate ICD therapy between the two groups by Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log rank test resulted in P = 0.04. CONCLUSION: Having all discriminatory variables activated with the nominal values, discriminatory performance differs between the two manufacturers. Further larger-scale studies are warranted to prospectively compare the performance of various available ICDs' discriminatory protocols, and define the optimum combination of discriminators in each ICD to decrease the rate of inappropriate therapy.

Defibrillators, Implantable↗

Cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators: in vitro magnetic resonance imaging evaluation at 1.5-tesla.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) performed at 1.5-Tesla on current generation pacemakers and ICDs to identify safe parameters for MRI examinations. METHODS: Pacemakers (Identity ADx XL DR+ 5386 and Identity ADx DR + 5380 generators; 1688T/52-cm atrial and ventricular leads) and ICDs (Atlas + V-243, Epic + V-236, and Epic + HF V-350 generators; Riata 1581/65-cm and QuickSite 1056K/75-cm leads; St. Jude Medical, Sylmar, California, USA) were evaluated for magnetic field interactions. MRI-related heating was assessed using various levels of RF power (SARs) and conditions that included scans on different body regions. Functional aspects of the devices were evaluated immediately before and after MRI procedures utilizing nine different pulse sequences. Induced currents were measured using a custom built system. RESULTS: Magnetic field interactions will not create a hazard for these pacemakers and ICDs. All scans of the "head" and "lumbar" regions resulted in temperature changes < or =0.5 degrees C at SARs ranging from 2.0 to 3.0-W/kg. For the "chest" area, temperature increases ranged from 0.4 degrees C to 3.6 degrees C at an SAR of 2.0-W/kg. No memory corruption, hardware changes, or changes in device parameters were seen. Magnetic field gradients have a low likelihood of inducing currents that would stimulate the heart. CONCLUSIONS: No hazardous magnetic field interactions or physiologically significant heating occurred for certain conditions. There was no permanent effect on device function. By following specific conditions, these pacemakers and ICDs may be safe for patients scanned at 1.5-Tesla.

Defibrillators, Implantable↗