Case report: inappropriate discharge of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator caused by the combined count criterion

Inappropriate Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy

Although improvements in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy have taken place, many challenges do remain. Inappropriate delivery of therapy is a big problem that impacts the quality of life of ICD recipients. Although there is now a clear understanding that atrial arrhythmias are the main cause of inappropriate ICD therapies, physicians have not been very successful in preventing them. Additionally, although many tachycardia detection discriminators have been shown to be helpful, it is not clear that there is a particular combination that is ideal for all patients. Until such an algorithm is developed (which may not be possible), a detailed knowledge and use of all available programming options, guided by special characteristics of each unique patient, are the only foreseeable solutions. Finally, one must face the prospect that this problem cannot be vanquished, but only ameliorated.

Prevention of inappropriate ICD shocks in patients with Brugada syndrome

BACKGROUND

In Brugada syndrome implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is associated with a high rate of inappropriate therapies, mainly due to supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVT) (2.7-14.1%/year). Aim of the present study was to evaluate a single ventricular fibrillation (VF) detection zone with a high cut-off rate with respect to prevention of inappropriate ICD shock due to SVT and safety of this programming.

METHODS

Sixty-one consecutive patients (mean age 42.6 +/- 12.9 years; 41 males) diagnosed with Brugada syndrome and implanted with an ICD were included. ICDs were prospectively programmed with a single VF detection zone and a cut-off rate of 222 beats/minute (bpm). A maximum of six shocks with the maximal shock energy were programmed. The minimal follow-up was 1 year.

RESULTS

During a follow-up of 47.6 +/- 23.1 months seven patients (2.91%/year) received appropriate ICD shocks. No patient suffered from syncope or died. Five patients (2.07%/year) received inappropriate ICD shocks: four patients due to T-wave oversensing and only one patient (0.4%/year) due to SVT (atrial fibrillation with a ventricular rate of >222 bpm).

CONCLUSIONS

Programming of a single, high-rate VF zone in patients with Brugada syndrome and an implanted defibrillator is safe. Such programming may be associated with reduced inappropriate defibrillator discharges. A single detection zone with a high VF cut-off rate can be recommended in patients with Brugada syndrome.

Shocking truths about implantable cardioverter defibrillator monitoring zones

A 36 year-old man with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and an ATLAS + DR implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) (St. Jude Medical, Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA) for primary prevention received a shock while cycling. The ventricular fibrillation detection threshold was 182 beats/min. An additional monitoring zone was programmed to 156 beats/min with all discriminators "on" except morphology. On interrogation, the ICD shock followed sinus tachycardia. In the absence of a monitoring zone, device therapy would not have been expected. We explore the mechanisms by which monitoring zones could potentially contribute to inappropriate ICD therapy and offer trouble-shooting tips.

Inappropriate implantable defibrillator discharge caused by a retained pacemaker lead fragment

INTRODUCTION

Inappropriate discharge is still a major issue of implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy. The diagnostic options of modern devices facilitate classification of the underlying abnormality.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A 65-year-old woman with depressed left ventricular performance received spurious shocks from an ICD, implanted for ventricular tachycardia. A lead fragment of an explanted VVI pacemaker system could be identified as cause of erroneous ventricular fibrillation detection by the ICD. The electrical noise caused by interaction between the lead remnant and the ICD lead was detectable even on the surface ECG.

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings, removal of fragmented lead material should be considered prior to ICD implantation, to avoid potentially adverse and harmful interactions with ICD systems.