Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Defibrillators”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 649 records · Page 36Linked to original sources
PubMed2006

Fully automatic external defibrillators in acute care: Clinicians' experiences and perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Fully automatic external defibrillators (FAEDs) reduce the time to defibrillation [Martinez-Rubio A, Kanaan N, Borggrefe M, Block M, Makijarvi M, Fedele F, et al. Advances in treating in-hospital cardiac arrest: safety and effectiveness of a new automatic external cardioverter-defibrillator. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41(4):627-32; Mattioni T, Kanaan N, Riggio D, Bahu M, Lin D, Welch S, et al. Performance of an automatic external-cardioverter-defibrillator algorithm in the discrimination of supraventricular from ventricular tachycardia. Am J Cardiol 2003;91:1323-6] and improve outcomes [Martinez-Rubio A, Kanaan N, Borggrefe M, Block M, Makijarvi M, Fedele F, et al. Advances in treating in-hospital cardiac arrest: safety and effectiveness of a new automatic external cardioverter-defibrillator. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41(4):627-32]. There is, however, no guidance or standard about their use in the UK. This paper presents the results of a study, which explored clinicians' experiences and perceptions of using FAEDs in acute care in the UK. AIMS: This study sought to understand clinicians' experiences and perceptions of the use of FAEDs in acute care and their impact on decision making. METHODS: Using a qualitative approach, 43 nurses and four physicians were included in a trial of FAEDs in a Coronary Care Unit (CCU) and cardiology ward during 2004. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nurses and physicians prior to and following the trial. Data were analysed using thematic analysis [Attride-Stirling J, Thematic networks: an analytic to research. Qual Res 2001;1(3):385-405]. RESULTS: Decision control, safety, a lack of confidence in the technology, previous experience and concerns about the psychological affect on patients affected clinicians' decision making and limited the use of the FAED. CONCLUSION: Despite reported benefits of the FAED [Martinez-Rubio A, Kanaan N, Borggrefe M, Block M, Makijarvi M, Fedele F, et al. Advances in treating in-hospital cardiac arrest: safety and effectiveness of a new automatic external cardioverter-defibrillator. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41(4):627-32; Mattioni T, Kanaan N, Riggio D, Bahu M, Lin D, Welch S, et al. Performance of an automatic external-cardioverter-defibrillator algorithm in the discrimination of supraventricular from ventricular tachycardia. Am J Cardiol 2003;91:1323-26], personal and contextual issues affected the clinicians' decision making. More and better understanding about how FAEDs and their context of use may challenge established practice is required in order that it is utilised in the most effective way.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2005

Clinical predictors of atrial defibrillation thresholds with a dual-coil, active pectoral lead system.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify clinical predictors of atrial defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) with standard implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads. BACKGROUND: Atrial defibrillation can be achieved with active pectoral, dual-coil transvenous ICD lead systems. If clinical predictors of atrial defibrillation efficacy with these lead systems were identified, they could be used to predict which patients may require more complex lead systems for atrial defibrillation, such as a coronary sinus electrode. METHODS: This was a prospective study of 135 consecutive patients undergoing initial ICD implant for standard indications. The lead system evaluated was a transvenous defibrillation lead with coils in the superior vena cava (SVC) and right ventricular apex (RV), and a left pectoral pulse generator emulator (CAN). The shocking pathway was RV-->SVC+CAN. Atrial DFT was measured using a step-up protocol. Clinical and echocardiographic parameters were evaluated as predictors of atrial DFT and multiple linear regression was performed. RESULTS: Mean atrial DFT was 4.6 +/- 3.8 J. Atrial DFT was < or =3 J in 70 patients (52%) and < or = 10 J in 97% of patients. The highest atrial DFT was 20 J (one patient). Left atrial size (r = 0.21, P = .01) and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (r = 0.19, P = .02) were independent predictors of atrial DFT. However, these two predictors accounted for only 6% of the variability in atrial DFT. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical parameters are of limited use in predicting atrial DFT with a dual-coil, active pectoral ICD lead system. Because the RV--> SVC + CAN shocking pathway provides reliable atrial and ventricular defibrillation, this configuration should be preferred for combined atrial and ventricular ICDs.

Atrial Fibrillation↗
PubMed2005

Mortality reduction by implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in high-risk patients with heart failure, ischemic heart disease, and new-onset ventricular arrhythmia: an effectiveness study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the generalizability of the reduction in mortality posed by implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, we examined the effectiveness of defibrillators as applied in routine medical practice. BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators have been shown to be efficacious in the primary and secondary prevention of overall and cardiovascular mortality in clinical trials. METHODS: Using the National Veterans Administration database, we identified a cohort of 6,996 patients from 1995 to 1999 with new-onset ventricular arrhythmia and pre-existing ischemic heart disease and congestive heart failure, of which 1,442 received a defibrillator, and followed them for three years to determine rates of mortality. With multivariate logistic regression analyses that adjusted for demographics, illness severity, and comorbidity, we assessed overall, cardiovascular, and noncardiovascular rates of mortality. To further address potential confounding, we also stratified the cohort by quintiles using a multivariable propensity score for each patient and determined mortality rates. RESULTS: For the overall cohort, multivariate regression showed that those who received defibrillators had significantly lower all-cause (odds ratio [OR] 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.60) and cardiovascular (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.65)] rates of mortality at three years. No significant differences were noted between groups in their rates of noncardiovascular mortality (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.10). Propensity score analysis demonstrated similar mortality reduction benefits at three years: risk ratio (RR) 0.72 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.79) for all-cause; RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.78) for cardiovascular; and RR 0.95 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.08) for noncardiovascular rates of mortality. These results suggest that one death is prevented in this patient population for every four to five patients receiving a defibrillator for three years. CONCLUSIONS: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in routine medical practice significantly reduce cardiovascular and all-cause rates of mortality at levels similar to secondary prevention trials.

Aged↗
PubMed1997

Factors associated with elevated impedance with a nonthoracotomy defibrillation lead system.

Peak current flow across the heart determines the success of defibrillation and is inversely dependent on impedance between defibrillation electrodes. Factors associated with elevated impedance in patients with implantable defibrillators using nonthoracotomy lead systems have not been well described. Clinical and echocardiographically derived variables were analyzed in 41 patients in whom implantation of a nonthoracotomy lead system was attempted. Lead impedance was measured at end-expiration with 5-J monophasic shocks. Successful defibrillation with or without addition of a subcutaneous patch with < or = 20 J with a monophasic waveform was required for nonthoracotomy lead placement. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on impedance: low (< or = 47 ohms, n = 30) and high (>47 ohms, n = 11). Twenty-four patients had successful defibrillator implantation using a transvenous lead alone, 13 required placement of a subcutaneous patch, and 4 required epicardial patch placement. The mean left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes were significantly smaller (p = 0.01 for both) in patients in the low- versus high-impedance groups and were significantly correlated with impedance (r = 0.44, p <0.005 for both). Impedance was not significantly different between patients with successful defibrillation using a transvenous lead alone compared with those who required either subcutaneous or epicardial patches. Thus, impedance using a nonthoracotomy lead system with monophasic shocks is significantly correlated with both end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes, but elevated impedance does not predict increased defibrillation energy requirements.

Defibrillators, Implantable↗
PubMed1998

Simplified implantation of single-lead pectoral cardioverter defibrillators using device-based testing.

Device-based testing of single-lead pectoral defibrillators (defibrillation efficacy testing without an external defibrillation system after complete implantation of the device) resulted in an adequate defibrillation threshold (< or = 20 J) in 45 of 50 study patients (90%). Mean surgical implantation time (skin to skin) was 62 +/- 29 minutes without perioperative mortality and without implantable cardioverter defibrillator infection during follow-up. Thus, device-based testing appears to be a simple and safe method to test defibrillation efficacy of single-lead pectoral defibrillators.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Interactions between implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and class III agents.

Although implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) can successfully terminate ventricular arrhythmias, antiarrhythmic drugs are often required to prevent recurrent events. Class III antiarrhythmic agents have emerged as the safest, most effective, and widely used agents in the 40-70% of ICD patients who require concomitant antiarrhythmic medication. Antiarrhythmic agents can influence the effectiveness of ICDs to terminate arrhythmias through their effect on defibrillation threshold. All class III agents share the ability to prolong ventricular refractoriness and those with "pure" class III activity consistently decrease defibrillation threshold in the normal canine heart model. Sotalol, amiodarone, and bretylium all have other Vaughan Williams class actions that influence their respective effects on defibrillation threshold. Sotalol has been associated with a decrease in defibrillation threshold in both animal and in clinical studies, whereas amiodarone has been associated with variable effects in animal models and an increase in defibrillation threshold in clinical studies. Additionally, antiarrhythmic agents may prolong ventricular tachycardia (VT) cycle length, which may affect the ability to pace terminate or cardiovert VT. Amiodarone has a moderate slowing effect on the VT cycle length. Finally, class III drugs also have proarrhythmic potential that may affect the defibrillator's function. Sotalol can be associated with dose-related torsade de pointes, whereas amiodarone may slow the VT cycle length below the tachycardia detection rate cutoff. In conclusion, class III pharmacotherapy can be safely administered in conjunction with ICD therapy as long as the interaction between these therapeutic modalities is appreciated.

Amiodarone↗
PubMed1995

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Evaluation of clinical neurologic outcome and electroencephalographic changes during implantation.

During placement of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, ventricular arrhythmias are induced to test the function of the devices. Although cerebral hypoperfusion and ischemic electroencephalographic changes occur in patients while implantable cardioverter-defibrillators are being tested, no investigation has assessed neurologic outcome in these patients. Nine patients having either implantation or change of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator underwent neurologic examination and neuropsychometric tests before and after the operation. After induction of general anesthesia and insertion of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads (when needed), ventricular fibrillation, ventricular flutter, or ventricular tachycardia, was induced by means of programmed electrical stimulation. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator testing continued until satisfactory lead placement was confirmed. The intraoperative electroencephalographic recording was analyzed for evidence of ischemic change. In all, an electroencephalogram was recorded during 50 periods of circulatory arrest. Mean duration of the arrest periods was 13.6 seconds. By means of conventional visual inspection of the raw electroencephalogram, high-amplitude rhythmic delta or theta, voltage attenuation, or loss of fast frequency activity was observed in 30 of the arrests. By means of an automated technique of electroencephalographic interpretation based on power spectral analysis, electroencephalographic changes were correctly identified in 26 of the arrests. The incidence of these electroencephalographic changes was dependent on the arrest duration. The mean interval from arrest onset to electroencephalographic change was 7.5 seconds (standard deviation +/- 1.8 seconds). In patients with electroencephalographic changes during multiple arrests, no downward trend in this interval was detected in later arrests and no evidence of persistent ischemic change was observed in electroencephalograms recorded after the conclusion of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator testing. Postoperative neurologic and neuropsychometric testing was completed in eight patients, none of whom exhibited a new neurologic deficit, exacerbation of a preexisting neurologic condition, or significant deterioration in neuropsychometric performance. We conclude that the brief arrest of cerebral circulation induced during insertion of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator is not associated with permanent neurologic injury.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

The treatment of patients with infected implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the treatment of patients with infected implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was done of the cases of 21 patients treated for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator infection during an 11-year period. RESULTS: Of 723 cardioverter-defibrillator implantations (550 primary implants, 173 replacements), nine (1.2%) were complicated by early postoperative device-related infections. Late infections developed in two patients 19 and 22 months, respectively, after implantation. Ten other patients were transferred to our institution for treatment of cardioverter-defibrillator infection. The time from implantation to overt infection was 2.2 +/- 1.3 months, excluding the two late infections. The responsible organisms were Staphylococcus aureus (9), Staphylococcus epidermidis (6), Streptococcus hemolyticus (1), gram-negative bacteria (3), Candida albicans (1), and Corynebacterium (1). All patients were treated with intravenous antibiotic drugs. Total system removal was done in 15 patients and partial removal in 2; in 4, the cardioverter-defibrillator system was not explanted. There were no perioperative deaths. A new implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system was reimplanted in 7 patients after 2 to 6 weeks of antibiotic therapy. Ten patients were treated without reimplantation (2 arrhythmia operation, 8 antiarrhythmic drugs). Four patients (3 patients without explantation and 1 with partial system removal) were treated with maintenance long-term antibiotic therapy. During a mean follow-up of 21 +/- 2.8 months, no patient had clinical recurrence of infection. One patient treated with antiarrhythmic drugs without system reimplantation died suddenly. CONCLUSIONS: Infections that involve implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems can be safely managed by removing the entire system with reimplantation after intravenous antibiotic therapy. In selected patients in whom the risk for system explantation is high and anticipated life expectancy is short, long-term antibiotic therapy to suppress low-virulence infections may represent an acceptable alternative.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

[Early defibrillation in the community: breaking barriers to save lives].

It is considered that in Spain, every year, we have more than 24,500 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. Around 85% of these are secondary to ventricular fibrillation, with possibility of reversion in more than 90% if defibrillation is performed in the first minute of arrhythmia. However, if we delay this defibrillation, survival possibilities disappear in a few minutes. Clinical advances in last decades have not achieved satisfactory results in the treatment of cardiac arrest as survival rates at hospital discharge do not exceed 7%. Aware of this situation, the International Scientific Societies are recommending decreasing time to defibrillation, advising, at best, a time less than five minutes between the 112-call (emergency) and adequate electric discharge. Development of automated defibrillators in Emergency Medical Systems and their use by < > of < > emergency services (police, fire fighters, etc) contribute to reach this objective. Because of this, Emergency Medical Systems are modifying their assistance strategies, to implement the early defibrillation as < >. Literature showed the effective value of automated defibrillators in the public areas but their efficiency level is less than that reached with the Emergency Services. Efficiency depends on multiple factors such as type of installation, accessibility level to emergency medical services or incidence rate of sudden cardiac arrest. Thus, their introduction should be preceded by a cost-effectiveness study. Effectiveness of automated defibrillators at home, where up to 80% of cardiac arrest are produced, has still not been evaluated. Nevertheless, in the USA, its marketing with this indication has been authorized.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Biphasic waveforms prevent the chronic rise of defibrillation thresholds with a transvenous lead system.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare chronic changes in monophasic and biphasic defibrillation thresholds using a uniform transvenous lead system and testing protocol. BACKGROUND: Defibrillation thresholds increase over time in patients with nonthoracotomy lead systems. This increase can result in an inadequate chronic defibrillation safety margin and could limit the safety of smaller pulse generators, which have a reduced maximal output. However, previous studies of the temporal changes of defibrillation thresholds evaluated complex lead systems or monophasic shock waveforms, neither of which are used with current technology. METHODS: This study was a prospective, randomized assessment of the effects of shock waveforms on the changes of transvenous defibrillation thresholds over time. Paired monophasic and biphasic thresholds were measured both at implantation and at follow-up (250 +/- 105 days) in 24 consecutive patients who were not receiving antiarrhythmic drugs. The lead system was a dual-coil Endotak C lead, and reverse polarity shocks (distal coil = anode) were delivered. RESULTS: Monophasic defibrillation thresholds increased from (mean +/- SD) 13.7 +/- 6.0 J to 16.8 +/- 6.7 J (p = 0.02), whereas biphasic thresholds were unchanged (10.4 +/- 4.3 J to 10.2 +/- 4.8 J, p = 0.86) in the same patients. Shock impedance chronically increased (47.0 omega to 50.5 omega, p = 0.02) and was unaffected by waveform. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that biphasic shocks prevent the chronic increase in defibrillation thresholds with a transvenous lead system.

Atrial Fibrillation↗
PubMed1998

The effects of ventricular fibrillation duration and site of initiation on the defibrillation threshold during early ventricular fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine if the defibrillation threshold (DFT) is lower during the first few cycles of ventricular fibrillation (VF) than after 10 s of VF and, if so, if the effect is caused by local or global factors. BACKGROUND: The DFT may be low very early during VF because: (1) for the first few cycles VF arises from a localized region close to a defibrillation electrode where the shock field is strong (local factors), or (2) during early VF the effects of ischemia and sympathetic discharge have not yet fully developed and the heart has not yet completely dilated (global factors). METHODS: Protocol 1 included seven pigs in which a defibrillation electrode and a pacing catheter were both placed in the right ventricular apex. VF was induced by delivering a high current premature stimulus from the pacing catheter that should have caused reentry confined to the right ventricular apex for the first few cycles of VF. A bipolar electrogram was recorded from the tip of the defibrillation catheter. Using a three reversal up-down protocol, the DFT was determined for biphasic shocks delivered after 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 15, 20 and 25 activations in this electrogram and after 10 s (control). Protocol 2 included seven pigs undergoing the same procedure as in protocol 1 except that an additional pacing catheter was placed in the left ventricle. Defibrillation thresholds were determined after 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 VF activations following VF induction from the right ventricle (RV) or the left ventricle (LV) and after 10 s (control). RESULTS: In protocol 1, the mean +/- SD DFrs were lower during the first three cycles than after 10 s of VF (3.0 +/- 4.1 J for the first VF cycle vs 15.8 +/- 6.6 J after 10 s of VF, p < 0.05). In protocol 2, the DFF for the first few cycles of VF induced away from the defibrillation electrode in the LV (6.9 +/- 1.4 J for the first VF cycle) was significantly lower than that after 10 s of VF (16.0 +/- 2.2 J), whereas the DFF for the first few cycles induced near the defibrillation electrode in the right ventricular apex was significantly lower (2.3 +/- 2.7 J for the first VF cycle) than that induced from the LV. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the DFT is significantly lower during the first few VF cycles of VF than after 10 s of VF and that this decrease may be caused by both local factors and global factors. These results provide an impetus for exploring earlier shock delivery in implantable devices.

Animals↗
PubMed1999

Outcome of patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and unexplained syncope treated with an implantable defibrillator.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, unexplained syncope and a negative electrophysiology test who are treated with an implantable defibrillator. BACKGROUND: Patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and unexplained syncope may be at high risk for sudden cardiac death, and they are sometimes treated with an implantable defibrillator. METHODS: This study prospectively determined the outcome of 14 consecutive patients who had a nonischemic cardiomyopathy, unexplained syncope and a negative electrophysiology test and who underwent defibrillator implantation (Syncope Group). Nineteen consecutive patients with a nonischemic cardiomyopathy and a cardiac arrest who were treated with a defibrillator (Arrest Group) served as a control group. RESULTS: Seven of 14 patients (50%) in the Syncope Group received appropriate shocks for ventricular arrhythmias during a mean follow-up of 24+/-13 months, compared with 8 of 19 patients (42%) in the Arrest Group during a mean follow-up of 45+/-40 months (p = 0.1). The mean duration from device implantation until the first appropriate shock was 32+/-7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 18 to 45 months) in the Syncope Group compared to 72+/-12 months (95% CI, 48 to 96 months) in the Arrest Group (p = 0.1). Among patients who received appropriate shocks, the mean time from defibrillator implantation to the first appropriate shock was 10+/-14 months in the Syncope Group, compared with 48+/-47 months in the Arrest Group (p = 0.06). Recurrent syncope was always associated with ventricular tachyarrhythmias. CONCLUSIONS: The high incidence of appropriate defibrillator shocks and the association of recurrent syncope with ventricular arrhythmias support the treatment of patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, unexplained syncope and a negative electrophysiology test with an implantable defibrillator.

Cardiomyopathy, Dilated↗
PubMed1999

Correlation of acute and chronic defibrillation threshold with upper limit of vulnerability determined in normal sinus rhythm.

BACKGROUND: The upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) is the stimulus strength above which ventricular fibrillation cannot be induced, even when the stimulus occurs during the vulnerable period of the cardiac cycle. Determination of ULV using T-wave shocks during ventricular pacing has been shown to closely correlate with the defibrillation threshold (DFT) at ICD implantation. However, there are no data correlating ULV determined in sinus rhythm at ICD implantation, with DFT determined at implantation or during long-term follow-up. This is of clinical importance since ULV may be used to estimate DFT during ICD implantation, both during ventricular pacing or sinus rhythm. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-one patients receiving a transvenous ICD system were studied prospectively. There were 16 males and 5 females, mean age 68 +/- 15 years, with mean ejection fraction 37.4 +/- 17.4%. All had structural heart disease. The ULV was defined as the lowest energy that did not induce ventricular fibrillation with shocks at 0, 20 and 40ms before the peak of the T-wave, using a step-down protocol. The initial energy tested was 15J and the lowest energy 2J. DFT was determined following a similar step-down protocol. The DFT was defined as the lowest energy that successfully defibrillated the ventricles. The linear correlation coefficient between ULV and DFT was r = 0.73 (p < 0.001). At implant, mean ULV was 9.2 +/- 5J, not statistically different from mean DFT 9.4 +/- 4J. ULV plus 5J successfully defibrillated 19 of 21 patients. During long-term follow-up of 10.1 +/- 1.8 months in eight patients, DFT was 8.8 +/- 5.8J, not significantly different than the DFT of 7.5 +/- 4.1J or ULV of 8.0 +/- 5.3 at implant. CONCLUSION: 1) When determined during normal sinus rhythm the ULV significantly correlates with DFT. 2) ULV testing might be used in lieu of standard DFT testing to confirm adequate lead placement thus minimizing or eliminating VF inductions, particularly in hemodynamically unstable patients. 3) Since ULV + 5J has a high probability of successful defibrillation in most patients, programming ICD first shock energy for VF at ULV + 5J may result in lower first shock energies compared to the standard methods of programming first shock energy at twice DFT. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to determine if the upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) determined during normal sinus rhythm correlates with the defibrillation threshold (DFT), as has been previously shown when determined during ventricular pacing. The linear correlation coefficient between the ULV and DFT was r = 0.73 (p < 0.001). Mean ULV at implant was 9.2 +/- 5J, not statistically different from mean DFT of 0.4 +/- 4J. During long-term follow-up of 10.1 +/- 1.8 months in 8 patients, DFT was 8.75 +/- 8J, not significantly different than the DFT of 7.5 +/- 4.1J or ULV of 8.0 +/- 5.3 at implant. Shocks energies of ULV + 5J successfully defibrillated 19 of 21 patients at implant and 8 of 8 at follow-up. This study indicates that the ULV determined in normal sinus rhythm closely correlates with the DFT, and that ULV + 5J defibrillated most patients. ULV testing could be used to predict DFT and reduce or eliminate the need for DFT testing and VF induction. Programming ICD first shock energy for VF to ULV + 5J will result in lower energy than that used with standard DFT testing.

Aged↗
PubMed1998

Influence of anaesthesia on defibrillation threshold.

Internal cardioverter-defibrillator implantation can be performed under local or general anaesthesia. Whether the technique of general anaesthesia influences the defibrillation threshold remains a matter of debate. We therefore compared, in a prospective, randomised clinical study, the effect of intravenous anaesthesia using propofol with inhalational anaesthesia using isoflurane on the defibrillation threshold in 68 patients scheduled for transvenous single-lead internal cardioverter-defibrillator implantation. Defibrillation threshold was measured at implantation and at device testing 1 week and 1 month after implantation. Patients acted as their own controls. Neither the anaesthetic technique nor the duration of anaesthesia was associated with significant changes in the defibrillation threshold. We conclude that in this group of high-risk patients, both types of anaesthesia are acceptable techniques for internal cardioverter-defibrillator implantation and testing.

Anesthesia, General↗
PubMed2003

Distal right ventricular coil position reduces defibrillation thresholds.

UNLABELLED: Distal RV Coil Position Reduces DFTs. INTRODUCTION: Understanding the factors that affect defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) has important implications both for optimization of defibrillation efficacy and for the design of new transvenous leads. The aim of this prospective study was to test the hypothesis that defibrillation efficacy is improved with the right ventricular (RV) coil in a distal position compared with a more proximal RV coil position. METHODS AND RESULTS: A novel defibrillation lead with three adjacent RV defibrillation coils (distal 0.8 cm, middle 3.7 cm, proximal 0.8 cm) was used for this study to permit comparison of DFTs with the proximal and distal RV coil positions without lead repositioning. In the distal RV configuration, the distal and middle RV coils were connected electrically as the anode for defibrillation. In the proximal RV configuration, the middle and proximal coils were the anode. A superior vena cava (SVC) coil and active can were connected electrically as the cathode (reversed polarity, RV-->Can+SVC). In each patient, the DFT was measured twice using a binary search protocol with the distal RV and proximal RV configurations, with the order of testing randomized. The study cohort consisted of 31 subjects (mean age 65 +/- 12 years, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 30% +/- 16%, 81% male predominance). The mean delivered energy (8.2 +/- 5.3 J vs 11.2 +/- 6.1 J), leading-edge voltage (335 +/- 109 V vs 393 +/- 118 V), and peak current (11.6 +/- 5.2 A vs 14.9 +/- 7.3 A) at DFT all were significantly lower with the distal RV configuration compared to the proximal RV configuration (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). CONCLUSION: DFTs are significantly reduced with the distal RV configuration compared to the proximal RV configuration. Defibrillation leads should be designed with the shortest tip to coil distance that can be achieved without compromising ventricular fibrillation sensing.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Optimization of atrial defibrillation with a dual-coil, active pectoral lead system.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial defibrillation can be achieved with standard implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads, but the optimal shocking configuration is unknown. The objective of this prospective study was to compare atrial defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) with three shocking configurations that are available with standard ICD leads. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study was a prospective, randomized, paired comparison of shocking configurations on atrial DFTs in 58 patients. The lead system evaluated was a transvenous defibrillation lead with coils in the superior vena cava (SVC) and right ventricular apex (RV) and a left pectoral pulse generator emulator (Can). In the first 33 patients, atrial DFT was measured with the ventricular triad (RV --> SVC + Can) and unipolar (RV --> Can) shocking pathways. In the next 25 patients, atrial DFT was measured with the ventricular triad and the proximal triad (SVC --> RV + Can) configurations. Delivered energy at DFT was significantly lower with the ventricular triad compared to the unipolar configuration (4.7 +/- 3.7 J vs 10.1 +/- 9.5 J, P < 0.001). Peak voltage and shock impedance also were significantly reduced (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in DFT energy when the ventricular triad and proximal triad shocking configurations were compared (3.6 +/- 3.0 J vs 3.4 +/- 2.9 J for ventricular and proximal triad, respectively, P = NS). Although shock impedance was reduced by 13% with the proximal triad (P < 0.001), this effect was offset by an increased current requirement (10%). CONCLUSION: The ventricular triad is equivalent or superior to other possible shocking pathways for atrial defibrillation afforded by a dual-coil, active pectoral lead system. Because the ventricular triad is also the most efficacious shocking pathway for ventricular defibrillation, this pathway should be preferred for combined atrial and ventricular defibrillators.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for the prevention of sudden death in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is a genetic disease associated with a risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and sudden death, especially in young patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study of the efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in preventing sudden death in 128 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who were judged to be at high risk for sudden death. RESULTS: At the time of the implantation of the defibrillator, the patients were 8 to 82 years old (mean [+/-SD], 40+/-16), and 69 patients (54 percent) were less than 41 years old. The average follow-up period was 3.1 years. Defibrillators were activated appropriately in 29 patients (23 percent), by providing defibrillation shocks or antitachycardia pacing, with the restoration of sinus rhythm; the average age at the time of the intervention was 41 years. The rate of appropriate defibrillator discharge was 7 percent per year. A total of 32 patients (25 percent) had episodes of inappropriate discharges. In the group of 43 patients who received defibrillators for secondary prevention (after cardiac arrest or sustained ventricular tachycardia), the devices were activated appropriately in 19 patients (11 percent per year). Of 85 patients who had prophylactic implants because of risk factors (i.e., for primary prevention), 10 had appropriate interventions (5 percent per year). The interval between implantation and the first appropriate discharge was highly variable but was substantially prolonged (four to nine years) in six patients. In all 21 patients with stored electrographic data and appropriate interventions, the interventions were triggered by ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: Ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation appears to be the principal mechanism of sudden death in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. In high-risk patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, implantable defibrillators are highly effective in terminating such arrhythmias, indicating that these devices have a role in the primary and secondary prevention of sudden death.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Transthoracic impedance study with large self-adhesive electrodes in two conventional positions for defibrillation.

External defibrillation requires the application of high voltage electrical impulses via large external electrodes, placed on selected locations on the thorax surface. The position of the electrodes is one of the major determinants of the transthoracic impedance (TTI) which influences the intracardiac current flow during electric shock and defibrillation success. The variety of factors which influence TTI measurements raised our interest to investigate the range of TTI values and the temporal TTI variance during long-term application of defibrillation self-adhesive electrodes in two conventional positions on the patient's chest--position 1 (sub-clavicular/sub-axillar position) and position 2 (antero-posterior position). The prospective study included 86 randomly selected volunteers (39 male and 49 female, 67 patients with normal skin, 13 patients with dry skin and 6 patients with greasy skin, 16 patients with chest pilosity and 70 patients without chest pilosity). The TTI was measured according to the interelectrode voltage drop obtained by passage of a low-amplitude high-frequency current (32 kHz) between the two self-adhesive electrodes (active area about 92 cm2). For each patient, the TTI values were measured within 10 s, 1 min and 5 min after sticking the electrodes to the skin surface, independently for the two tested electrode positions. We found that the expected TTI range is between 58 Omega and 152 Omega for position 1 and between 55 Omega and 149 Omega for position 2. Although the two TTI ranges are comparable, we measured significantly higher TTI mean of about (107.2 +/- 22.3) Omega for position 1 compared to (96.6 +/- 19.2) Omega for position 2 (p = 0.001). This fact suggested that the antero-posterior position of the electrodes is favourable for defibrillation. Within the investigated time interval of 5 min, we observed a significant TTI reduction with about 6.9% (7.4 Omega/107.2 Omega) for position 1 and about 5.3% (5.1 Omega/96.6 Omega) for position 2. We suppose that the long-term application of self-adhesive electrodes would lead to improvement of the physical conditions for conduction of the defibrillation current and to diminution of energy loss in the electrode-skin contact impedance. We found that gender is important when position 1 is used because women have significantly higher TTI (111 +/- 20.3) Omega compared to the TTI of men (102.6 +/- 24) Omega (p = 0.0442). Although we found some specifics of the electrode-skin contact layer, we can conclude that because of the insignificant differences in TTI, the operator of the defibrillator paddles does not need to take into consideration the skin type and pilosity of the patients. Analysis of the correlations between TTI and the individual patient characteristics (chest size, weight, height, age) showed that these patient characteristics are unreliable factors for prediction of the TTI values and optimal defibrillation pulse parameters and energy.

Adhesives↗