Combination of antitachycardia pacemaker and automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator for ventricular tachycardia

[History of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in Germany]

The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was a breakthrough in the prevention of sudden cardiac death. After years of technical development in the USA, Michel Mirowski succeeded in proving reliable automatic defibrillation of ventricular tachyarrhythmias through initial human implantations in 1980, despite many obstacles. Nearly 4 years later, the first patients received ICDs at multiple centers in Germany. Subsequently, outside the USA, Germany became the country with highest implantation rates. The absolute number of implantations remained small as long as implantations required epicardial defibrillation electrodes and therefore thoracotomy by cardiac surgeons. Pacemaker-like implantation using a transvenous defibrillation electrode with a pectoral ICD became feasible in the early 1990s pushing implantation rates to the next level. Technical advancements were accompanied by clinical research in Germany, and often, the first-in-human studies were conducted in Germany. In 1991, the first guidelines for indications were established in the USA and Germany. Several randomized studies on indications were published between 1996 and 2009, mostly led by American teams with German participation, but also under German leadership (CASH, CAT, DINAMIT, IRIS). The DANISH study in 2016 questioned the results of these long-standing studies. Instead of providing ICDs to patients using a broad indication, future efforts aim to identify patients who, despite optimal medical therapy, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), and/or catheter ablation, need protection against sudden cardiac death. Risk scores incorporating myocardial scars in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and genetic information are expected to contribute to more individualized and effective indications.

Arrhythmia recognition strategies and hardware decisions for the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator--a review

The avoidance of inappropriate shocks from the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), together with its need to apply antitachycardia pacing to either atria or ventricles, demands considerable sophistication in the design of algorithms to interpret electrical or other cardiac signals in real-time. Methods based on rate and using single short-gap bipolar leads lack discrimination. Right ventricular electrogram morphology algorithms offer improvement but no universal algorithm exists; however, for any given patient an optimum algorithm of this type might be found. One improvement would be to provide atrial information in addition, by employing more than one electrode or a long-gap single bipolar lead. Alternatively, transducer signals could be included, once their efficacy and reliability have been improved. A different approach would be to use the much more sophisticated algorithms at present being tried with surface electrocardiograms. Integrated Circuit technology is reaching the point where this could be done but the requirement for exceptionally high reliability means that special system structures, such as a Memory Intensive Computer Architecture, may be required. When decisions on these approaches are to be made, it must also be remembered that ICDs will soon be implanted and programmed as a routine rather than a highly specialized procedure.

Efficacy of a tiered therapy defibrillator system used to treat recurrent ventricular arrhythmias refractory to drugs

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate an implantable tiered therapy defibrillator system that delivered antitachycardia pacing treatment for slower well tolerated ventricular tachycardias and cardioversion or defibrillation for fast tachycardias or ventricular fibrillation.

METHODS

A tiered treatment device (Ventritex Cadence V-100) was implanted in 30 patients with ventricular tachycardia that was refractory to drugs. Efficacy was evaluated by the responses of induced or spontaneous arrhythmias to the treatments delivered.

RESULTS

Antitachycardia pacing successfully terminated 80% of episodes of ventricular tachycardia induced by non-invasive programmed stimulation, but acceleration was brought about by pacing in six patients in 10% of episodes. During a follow up of two to 17 (mean seven) months, 18 patients (60%) had recurrence of ventricular arrhythmias. Antitachycardia pacing terminated ventricular tachycardia in 17 of 18 patients in 87% of episodes. Twelve patients received shocks for ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. Failure of pacing, with subsequent cardioversion, occurred in nine patients (50%) in one or more episodes. Acceleration of tachycardia by pacing occurred in 10 patients in 5% of episodes. Only two of these patients had experienced acceleration of previously induced arrhythmia. Five patients had spontaneous fast ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation treated by cardioversion or defibrillation. Spurious treatment was delivered in nine patients (30%), during atrial fibrillation in five, sinus tachycardia in two, and because of fracture of the sensing lead system in two patients. The retrieval of stored intracardiac electrograms was of clinical value in assessing spurious treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Tiered treatment was effective in terminating recurrent ventricular arrhythmias in these selected patients. Most episodes were treated successfully by pacing, and resistant tachycardias, pacing induced acceleration, or haemodynamically compromising arrhythmias were treated by shocks.

Long-term multicenter experience with a second-generation implantable pacemaker-defibrillator in patients with malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias. The Guardian Multicenter Investigators Group

A second-generation implantable pacemaker-cardioverter-defibrillator was evaluated in 200 patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation or prior cardiac arrest. The device permits demand ventricular pacing for bradyarrhythmias and for long QT interval or tachycardia suppression, uses programmable (3 to 30 J) energy shocks for conversion of ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation and is used with conventional pacing and defibrillation leads. Ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation recognition is based on the ventricular electrogram rate and requires reconfirmation before shock delivery. Two hundred patients (mean age 62 years, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 36%) were enrolled and followed up for 0 to 23 months (mean 12). Epicardial lead system implantation was performed with use of an anterolateral thoracotomy (38%), median sternotomy (26%) and subxiphoid (20%) or subcostal (16%) approach. Perioperative mortality rate was 5.5% (all nonarrhythmic deaths). Implant defibrillation threshold ranged from 3 to 30 J (mean 15), with initial programmed shock energy ranging from 3 to 30 J (mean 22). Ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation sensing threshold ranged from 0.7 to 1.8 mV (median 1) and the tachycardia detection interval from 288 to 416 ms (median 320). Reprogramming of implant variables was necessary for reliable electrographic sensing (54 patients), programmed shock therapy (61 patients) and tachycardia detection rate (63 patients). Device activation for potential shock delivery occurred in 111 patients (55.5%) with actual shock delivery after ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation reconfirmation in 66 patients (33%). During follow-up study, there was a 1% arrhythmia mortality rate, 6.5% cardiac mortality rate and 10.5% total mortality rate. This study demonstrates that the programmable implantable pacemaker-cardioverter-defibrillator is effective in preventing arrhythmic death, yet reduces patient exposure to repeated shock therapy. Reprogramming is usually necessary during follow-up for optimal function.

Ninety-six episodes of spontaneous ventricular tachycardia in 1 week: success of ramp pacing by a pacer-cardioverter-defibrillator

This case report describes the flexibility and usefulness of a pacer-cardioverter-defibrillator for the management of a 63-year-old patient with malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Ninety of 96 episodes of ventricular tachycardia were terminated successfully with ramp pacing in a 1-week period. In those patients who have frequent episodes of ventricular tachycardia that respond to antitachycardia pacing, the multifunction device can add to the patient's comfort and increase acceptance of this type of device.

The impact of antitachycardia pacing with defibrillation

Chronic recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) can be reproducibly terminated by programmed endocardial right ventricular stimulation. However, antitachycardia pacing can be associated with possible acceleration of VT, while frequent episodes of VT and patient discomfort can limit treatment by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The combined use of antitachycardia pacing and the AICD (automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator) was evaluated in 6 out of 51 patients (age 57 +/- 11 years) in whom the AICD had been implanted because of recurrent VT. In each instance VT could be terminated by temporary overdrive pacing. The interactive mode of VT termination by a pacemaker (Tachylog) as well as by the AICD was assessed after implantation. In the automatic mode, the Tachylog functioned as a bipolar, ventricular inhibited (VVI) device with antitachycardia burst stimulation capability, allowing two to five stimuli at intervals of 260-300 ms and one or two interventions. During follow-up of 47 +/- 24 months, the Tachylog terminated VT reliably 50-505 times per patient. When burst stimulation accelerated VT, termination was achieved by AICD discharge. Thus, drug resistant VT can be terminated by antitachycardia pacing to avoid patient discomfort. In the event of tachycardia acceleration, VT was terminated by the AICD. A universal pacemaker-defibrillator should combine antibradycardia and antitachycardia pacing with back-up cardioversion defibrillation.

Device interaction--antitachycardia pacemakers and defibrillators for sustained ventricular tachycardia

We evaluated the combined use of permanent automatic antitachycardia pacemakers and implanted defibrillators in ten patients with recurrent monomorphic sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT). Pacemaker programming was VVI-T automatic burst in eight patients, VVI-T magnet mode in one patient, and VVI in one patient. Device interactions occurred in four patients, requiring changes in pacemaker programming. These included defibrillator multiple counting during pacing, inappropriate pacemaker bursts initiating VT, inappropriate reset of the pacemaker antitachycardia mode by defibrillation, defibrillator discharge after pacemaker VT termination, and defibrillator VT reinitiation. Two patients required pacemaker programming out of the antitachycardia mode, and two required a change in antitachycardia pacing parameters. Seven patients remain in automatic VVI-T and three in VVI modes. Mean follow-up is 13 months and all patients are alive. Thus, although pacemaker/defibrillator combinations function well for patients with more than one VT rate, device interactions occur frequently and may require pacemaker reprogramming or elimination of the overdrive mode. Combined use of these devices should be cautiously considered when single device therapy is unsatisfactory. Devices that combine both pacing and defibrillation features may reduce adverse interaction.

Differentiation of ventricular tachyarrhythmias

Implantable devices capable of several modes of therapy will require differentiation of various ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Three methods of arrhythmia analysis, magnitude-squared coherence, ventricular rate, and irregularity of cycle length were performed for 45 episodes of induced ventricular tachyarrhythmia in 15 patients. Differentiation of monomorphic ventricular tachycardia from polymorphic ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation was possible by mean magnitude-squared coherence, less possible by rate, and not possible by beat-to-beat irregularity. Faster monomorphic ventricular tachycardia overlapped with rates of polymorphic ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation. Differentiation of polymorphic ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation was not possible by rate or irregularity. A progressive decrease in mean magnitude-squared coherence from monomorphic ventricular tachycardia to polymorphic ventricular tachycardia to ventricular fibrillation strengthens previous observations that coherence is a measure of rhythm "organization."

Clinical interactions between pacemakers and automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

Concomitant use of a pacemaker and an automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (AICD) is common. Seventeen percent of patients receiving an AICD at The Johns Hopkins Hospital also had a permanent pacemaker implanted before (16 patients), at the same time as (2 patients) or after (12 patients) AICD implantation. Four types of interactions were noted: 1) transient failure to sense or capture immediately after AICD discharge (seven patients); 2) oversensing of the pacemaker stimulus by the AICD, leading to double counting (one patient); 3) AICD failure to sense ventricular fibrillation resulting from pacemaker stimulus oversensing (three patients, one only at high asynchronous output); and 4) pacemaker reprogramming caused by AICD discharge (three patients). No clinical sequelae of these interactions were noted during follow-up study. Thus, potentially adverse clinical interactions are common and routine screening is recommended. With proper attention to lead placements and programming of the devices, clinical consequences of these interactions can be avoided.

Role of antitachycardia devices in the treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias

Chronic recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) can be terminated reproducibly by programmed endocardial right ventricular stimulation. However, antitachycardia pacing is associated with possible acceleration of VT, while frequent occurrence of VT and discomfort of the patient can limit treatment with an automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (AICD; Cardiac Pacemakers Inc.). The combined use of antitachycardia pacing (Tachylog pacemaker; Siemens-Elema) and AICD was therefore evaluated in 6 of 35 patients (aged 50 to 70 years, mean 60.1 +/- 7.7) in whom AICD had been implanted because of VT, which could be terminated by temporary overdrive pacing. With the interactive mode of the Tachylog, termination of VT by the pacemaker as well as by the AICD was assessed after implantation. In the automatic mode, the Tachylog functioned as a bipolar ventricular inhibited (VVI) device with antitachycardia burst stimulation: 2 to 5 stimuli, interval 260 to 300 ms, 1 to 2 interventions. During follow-up of 32 +/- 17 months, the Tachylog terminated VT reliably 50 to 505 times per patient. When burst stimulation accelerated VT, termination was achieved by AICD discharge. Thus, drug-resistant VT can be terminated by antitachycardia pacing avoiding patient discomfort. In case of acceleration, VT can be controlled by the AICD. A universal pacemaker should combine antibradycardia and antitachycardia pacing with backup cardioversion/defibrillation mode.

Devices for tachycardia termination

Remarkable advances have been made over the last 2 decades in the management of tachyarrhythmias. Simultaneous developments have provided new drugs, new surgical and catheter ablation techniques and new implantable devices. Initial enthusiasm with antitachycardia pacemakers was tempered by the realization of dangers and difficulties associated with their use, particularly in the treatment of ventricular tachycardia. However, progress has been made along several lines: (1) improvements in the automatic detection of target tachyarrhythmias; (2) the development of termination algorithms that are more adaptable to spontaneous changes in the tachycardia termination zone; (3) improvements in the safety of termination algorithms; (4) development of automatic cardioversion or defibrillation for the management of malignant ventricular arrhythmias; and (5) incorporation of multiple pacing facilities in single implantable units.

Implantable electrical devices in the management of tachyarrhythmias

Electrical therapy for tachyarrhythmias attempts to achieve one or more of three aims: a) prevention of tachycardia; (b) control of the hemodynamic effect of tachycardia; (c) termination of tachycardia. In practice, long term control of tachycardia in selected patients can be achieved with implantable devices which can automatically recognize and terminate tachycardias. Termination can be achieved with a number of pacing modalities. These pacing modalities are reviewed in this article and some guidelines to the choice of modality are given. Patients with supraventricular tachycardia are often more appropriately treated with drugs or surgery but some can be effectively treated with antitachycardia pacing. Some patients with ventricular tachycardia can be successfully treated with these devices but this group is at risk of tachycardia acceleration or degeneration in response to pacing. An implantable cardioverter-defibrillator should be used as a backup in these patients. Present generation devices now incorporate antitachycardia pacing, low energy cardioversion, and higher energy defibrillation in the same unit.

Permanent antitachycardia pacemaker therapy for ventricular tachycardia

This article describes our experience with an antitachycardia pacemaker alone (N = 3) or in combination with an automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (AICD, N = 8) in the treatment of ventricular tachycardia. Eleven patients (mean ejection fraction 31%, mean age 67 years) received an antitachycardia pacemaker. Nine had their units programmed for automatic antitachycardia pacing, one unit was programmed to automatic antitachycardia pacing by magnet activation only, and one to tachycardia detection and bradycardia support. Of the nine patients with automatic antitachycardia pacing, seven received appropriate and successful pace termination of spontaneous ventricular tachycardia at up to 120 times per month. Eight of these nine have had AICD implantations as well. There were no operative complications. Over a mean (+/- SD) follow-up of 12.1 +/- 9.3 months (range 3-29 months), there have been two deaths, both due to heart failure. There have been four AICD discharges in three patients. Two units discharged in a clinically appropriate setting. The other two units, both with rate cutoffs less than 200 beats/min, were inadvertently triggered by the antitachycardia pacemaker and/or the underlying rate. In addition to the careful selection of the defibrillator rate cutoff, adverse device-device interactions were avoided by careful intraoperative lead positioning, and the disabling of bradycardia pacing when not needed or contraindicated. Antitachycardia pacing, with the safety provided by the AICD, is an effective treatment for patients with medically refractory ventricular tachycardia.

Combined automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and pacemaker systems: implantation techniques and follow-up

The automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (AICD) effectively prevents death due to ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. Some patients who need an AICD also require cardiac pacing to treat symptomatic bradycardia, bradycardia after defibrillation, or to provide a rate floor to reduce the frequency of bradycardia-related ventricular arrhythmias. Some patients also can benefit from antitachycardia pacing. A mapping technique to implant a pacemaker and AICD sensing leads is presented. For patients with a pacemaker who later need an AICD, the left ventricle is mapped with use of the AICD rate-sensing electrodes to identify a site at which the minimal pacemaker stimulus and maximal ventricular electrogram amplitudes are recorded. An external cardioverter-defibrillator that has amplifiers similar to those in the AICD is used to monitor the rate-sensing electrogram. For patients with an implanted AICD, pacemaker implantation is undertaken by mapping the right ventricle with the pacemaker lead while the AICD is in standby mode; the AICD beep monitor is then used to determine a site where pacemaker stimulus detection by the AICD does not occur. Eight patients underwent implantation of a combined AICD-pacemaker system (four ventricular antitachycardia pacemakers, three ventricular demand pacemakers and one atrial demand pacemaker). Neither inhibition of AICD arrhythmia detection nor double counting occurred. Satisfactory AICD-pacemaker function was shown in all patients postoperatively, and no pacemaker malfunction was observed. Thus, with currently available technology, a combined AICD-pacemaker system can be implanted with satisfactory function of both devices and without adverse device-device interactions.

Implanted automatic defibrillators: effects of drugs and pacemakers

The automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator is an effective device for prevention of sudden cardiac death. Patients who require the implantation of the device often require permanent pacing for symptomatic bradyarrhythmias and may require antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Antiarrhythmic drugs may alter the defibrillation thresholds, arrhythmia cycle length and frequency, pacing thresholds and postshock excitability. Interactions between the defibrillator and the pacemaker may result in sensing problems, leading to multiple counting and inappropriate shocks, or ventricular fibrillation nondetection, sensing or capture failure post defibrillation and pacemaker reprogramming induced by defibrillator discharge. The potential for interactions will increase as the new generation of programmable defibrillators become clinically available, combining features of permanent pacemakers, antitachycardia pacemakers and defibrillators.

Electrical devices for treatment of arrhythmias

Electrical devices can be used for preventing and terminating tachycardia and for achieving hemodynamic improvement during a continuing tachycardia. Conventional approaches to tachycardia prevention include pacing at physiologic rates to prevent brady-cardia-related tachycardia or tachycardias associated with prolonged QT-interval syndromes. More exotic techniques, such as those involving stimulation during the refractory period, are undergoing investigation. Some tachycardias cannot be easily terminated or recur incessantly. Hemodynamics can be improved by pacing methods that result in a narrower QRS complex by coupled pacing and, in supraventricular tachycardias, by pacing rapidly enough to create atrioventricular block. Most clinical tachycardias are caused by reentry. Careful analysis of the timing of individual stimuli that successfully terminate tachycardias indicate that critical relations exist in the conduction velocity, refractoriness and physical properties and dimensions of the reentry circuit and the remaining myocardium. Elucidating these relations has permitted inferences into the mechanisms by which pacing terminates or accelerates tachycardias. A vast number of pacing patterns have evolved for use in tachycardia termination. None of these appear to be foolproof. There is widespread and justified concern about the risk of acceleration of tachycardia when antitachycardia pacing is used in the ventricle. Experience indicates that only a few patients are suitable for termination of ventricular tachycardia by pacing, but these carefully selected patients may do well. Both the results and the potential for widespread use may be better with pacing for termination of supraventricular tachycardia. Life-threatening tachycardias or fibrillation can be terminated by direct-current countershock. Although many technical problems remain, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, possibly combined with antitachycardia pacemakers, will play an increasing role in the management or serious arrhythmias.

Automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (AICD) and antitachycardia pacemaker (Tachylog): combined use in ventricular tachyarrhythmias

Antitachycardia pacing in ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT) is associated with potential acceleration of VT; frequency of VT and discomfort of the patient (pt) can limit treatment with the AICD. We therefore evaluated the combined use of antitachycardia pacing and AICD in 6 of 14 patients (age 50-70, mean 60 years) with AICD implantation because of VT, which could be terminated by temporary overdrive pacing. With the interactive mode of the Tachylog, termination of VT by the pacemaker as well as by the AICD was assessed after implantation. In the automatic mode, the Tachylog functioned as a bipolar VVI device with antitachycardia burst stimulation: 2-5 stimuli, interval 260-300 ms, 1-2 interventions. During follow-up of 12 +/- 5 months, the Tachylog terminated VT reliably 20 to 327 times per patient. In three patients, burst stimulation accelerated VT, which was terminated then by the AICD discharge.

CONCLUSION

Drug resistant ventricular tachyarrhythmias can be terminated by the Tachylog pacemaker avoiding patients' discomfort. In case of acceleration, ventricular tachyarrhythmias can be controlled by the automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator. A universal pacemaker should combine antitachycardia pacing with back-up defibrillation mode.