Late improvement in ventricular performance following internal cardioversion for persistent atrial fibrillation: an argument in support of concealed cardiomyopathy

Acute and chronic haemodynamic effects of biventricular pacing and of switching to different pacing modalities in heart failure patients

BACKGROUND

In patients with severe heart failure, sinus rhythm and wide QRS complex biventricular (BiV) pacing leads to clinical and haemodynamic improvement, but the immediate reversibility of these changes is not known.

METHODS

We assessed the acute and medium-term (3-month) haemodynamic effects of BiV pacing and of switching to other pacing modalities in 21 patients with severe heart failure, sinus rhythm and QRS>or=130 ms. Haemodynamic studies were performed: 1) at the time of implantation of a BiV pacing device, during AAI pacing, atrial synchronous right ventricular (RV) pacing, atrial synchronous left ventricular (LV) pacing and atrial synchronous BiV pacing (all at 100 bpm); 2) after 3 months of continuous BiV pacing--with evaluations being made by switching to RV and the other pacing modalities.

RESULTS

At both the acute and medium-term evaluations, BiV pacing provided the greatest improvement in cardiac index. Switching from BiV to RV pacing led to a more marked decrease in the cardiac index at 3 months. No strict correlation was evident between acute and medium-term effects of BiV pacing on cardiac index.

CONCLUSION

Cardiac resynchronization by BiV pacing provides acute/medium-term improvements in cardiac index. Sudden, medium-term failure of LV stimulation can lead to an even more pronounced haemodynamic derangement than that inducible by RV pacing at baseline. Acute haemodynamic evaluations do not seem to provide a powerful way for identifying medium-term responders.

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.

Clinical Experience with a New Detection Algorithm for Differentiation of Supraventricular from Ventricular Tachycardia in a Dual-Chamber Defibrillator

INTRODUCTION

Inadequate therapy for supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVT) is a frequent problem of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD). Dual-chamber ICDs have been developed to improve discrimination of SVT from ventricular tachycardia (VT). We investigated the positive predictivity, sensitivity, and specificity of a new algorithm, the SMART detection trade mark algorithm, incorporated in the Phylax AV (Biotronik) dual-chamber ICD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two hundred nine patients (185 men, age 64 +/- 11 years) received a Phylax AV ICD with SMART detection trade mark activated. In 138 of these patients, 1,245 sustained tachycardia episodes with a detailed electrogram were stored in the device during a follow-up period of 10 +/- 6 months. Episodes were correctly classified as ventricular fibrillation (VF, n = 178) in 52 patients, VT (n = 641) in 98 patients, and SVT (n = 385) in 48 patients by the algorithm. Forty-one true SVT episodes (3.3%) were misclassified as VT: atrial fibrillation (n = 7) and flutter (n = 1), sinus tachycardia (n = 12), and other SVT (n = 21). The positive predictivity for VF/VT was 94.5% (95% CI 92.7-95.8) uncorrected and 94.5% (95% CI 92.9-95.8%) corrected with the generalized equation estimation (GEE) method. The positive predictivity for SVT was 100%. The specificity was 88.9% (95% CI 85.6-91.6%) uncorrected and 89.0% (95% CI 85.6-91.6%) corrected with the GEE method with a sensitivity of 100%.

CONCLUSION

The SMART detection trade mark algorithm was safe and reliable for the detection of all ventricular tachycardias. Although its specificity was high, it should be improved with regard to SVT to avoid inappropriate ICD therapies.