Experience with a new implantable pacer-, cardioverter-defibrillator for the therapy of recurrent sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias: a step toward a universal ventricular tachyarrhythmia control device

Development of the Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: JACC Historical Breakthroughs in Perspective

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) represent transformational technology, arguably the most significant advance in cardiovascular medicine in 50 years. The vision and determination of pioneers Mirowski and Mower was fundamental to this monumental achievement, working with limited resources and confronted by skepticism/criticism from medical establishment. The inventors were followed >35 years in which a multitude of innovative clinical scientists and engineers introduced technological advances leading to the sophisticated devices in practice today. A pivotal patient experiment with automated termination of ventricular fibrillation (1980) led to U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval. Transvenous lead systems converted ICDs from thoracotomy-based secondary prevention to primary prevention of sudden death devices in countless patients worldwide. ICD acceptance was solidified by prospective randomized controlled trials showing reduced mortality superior to antiarrhythmic drugs. ICDs eventually expanded from coronary disease to inherited arrhythmia conditions (eg, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy). The ICD breakthrough story demonstrates how significant progress is possible in medicine against all odds, given fearless imagination to pursue novel ideas that conflict with accepted wisdom.

What risk should justify implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy?

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) were developed to prevent sudden cardiac death in patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). Their safety and efficacy have been proved in multiple retrospective and prospective studies. Many of the published trials were directed at secondary prevention for patients who had already had a sudden cardiac death or a sustained VT. For primary prevention, the information available is limited, as only 2 trials have yet been published. Ongoing trials will probably allow us to broaden the indications for prophylactic ICD implantation. Justification of the risk will have to be evaluated against complexity of the implant, the latter including not only cost but quality of life and morbidity associated with an ICD. However, our efforts still have to be directed to improve risk stratification and to decrease the complexity of the procedure.

Analysis of the intraventricular electrogram for differentiation of distinct monomorphic ventricular arrhythmias

This study investigated the effectiveness of correlation waveform analysis for identifying different ventricular electrogram morphologies of multiple VTs in the same patient. Patients with implantable antitachycardia devices are commonly subject to the occurrence of more than one distinct monomorphic VT. Each of these VTs may have unique therapeutic alternatives for termination. VTs with identical and different monomorphic configurations were recorded (1-500 Hz) using distal bipolar (1 cm) and distal unipolar electrograms from the right ventricular apex. Thirty-six distinct monomorphic VTs induced in 15 patients were analyzed. Nine VTs with identical morphologies (12/12 surface ECGs) were induced twice and used as a control. A template was created for each VT induced. Correlation waveform analysis was used to compare each depolarization of all other VTs induced subsequently in the same patient. The mean correlation coefficient (p mu) of cycle-by-cycle analysis was used as a discriminant function: p mu > or = 0.95 was considered matched; and p mu < 0.95 was considered distinct. From the control population, VTs were successfully classified as identical in 9 of 9 cases (100%) using both bipolar and unipolar electrograms. VTs with different monomorphic configurations were successfully classified as being different in 31 of 33 cases (94%) using bipolar electrogram analysis and in 29 of 33 cases (88%) using the unipolar. Template matching is effective for detecting: (1) the recurrence of VTs, which are identical; and (2) the occurrence of a VT with a different configuration. This method appears effective using either unipolar or bipolar intracardiac waveforms.

Experience with unipolar pectoral defibrillation

With simple, single lead unipolar pectoral defibrillators, ICD technology has reached a level of ease and safety comparable to pacemaker implantation. It will be difficult to further decrease the morbidity associated with ICD implantation; just as it will be difficult to improve upon current device treatment of sudden cardiac death. Even as further incremental improvements in devices and leads will undoubtedly occur, at this point in ICD evolution, it is investigating the expanded use of this therapy as a prevention tool that is likely to have the largest overall impact on cardiac arrest survival.

Unipolar pectoral defibrillation systems

Over the past 15 years, the implantation of automatic defibrillations has evolved from an obscure, impractical, and often morbid procedure to nearly a routine therapy. Initial large abdominally implanted generators with multiple epicardial leads have given way to much smaller, pectorally implanted systems utilizing only a single lead. These systems are better accepted by physicians and patients and rival recent-generation pacemakers in their implantation simplicity. Outcomes with single lead defibrillator implantation have been excellent. They are 99% effective at eliminating sudden death in large cohorts of patients, with overall survival of 94.4% at 18 months. Previously significant perioperative complications and mortality associated with epicardial systems have been virtually eliminated. Transvenous single lead systems now provide defibrillation efficacy at a level that makes epicardial leads unnecessary in most patients. Although inappropriate shocks are not a morbid complication, they still occur in approximately 15%-30% of patients. This is an area for improvement in defibrillator therapy, which, though invisible in total mortality statistics, is significant in terms of patient comfort and acceptance. Incremental improvements in pulse generator design and defibrillator lead technology are being made. Perhaps the most interesting new development will be the dual chamber device, incorporating and atrial electrode for sensing, pacing, and perhaps, atrial defibrillation. Such improvements will continue to make device therapy of all arrhythmias more versatile and improve patient comfort both in terms of device size and inappropriate shocks. It is unlikely, however, that further technological advances can further diminish the already small complication rate or improve the already excellent efficacy of current single lead systems. Defibrillator technology has already reached a maturity where technological improvements are less significant than efforts to better define the patient population who will benefit from the therapy.

Impact of implant techniques on complications with current implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) treatment has been in use since 1980 to prevent sudden cardiac death. The high efficacy of the original epicardial systems to terminate tachyarrhythmias was impaired by a substantial perioperative mortality and morbidity. The more "modern" transvenous ICD systems have shown a similar high efficacy in terminating ventricular tachyarrhythmias, but with a lower mortality and morbidity. As a background for discussing the impact on complications with present transvenous implantation techniques, the literature was reviewed. A large pacemaker series was used for comparison. Lead complications clearly related to design, material, or manufacture were not reviewed. The present review, covering 107 references over 40 years, gives support for the notion that in transvenously implanted ICD patients the incidence of acute and late complications related to implantation technique is now acceptable. The rate of hematomas, symptomatic thromboembolic complications, perforations, and to a certain degree infections could be improved, however. The major risk factors for implantation-related complications are discussed, and suggestions for future improvement are given.

Comparison of three cardioverter defibrillator implantation techniques: initial results with transvenous pectoral implantation

A total of 121 patients underwent epicardial (n = 32), transvenous abdominal (n = 30), and transvenous pectoral (n = 59) ICD implants. Perioperative complications were defined as those occurring within 30 days after surgery. Hospital costs were calculated with $750 per day as a fixed charge. Duration of surgery was the time between the first skin incision and the last skin suture. Severe perioperative complications that were life-threatening or required surgical intervention occurred in the epicardial (6%) and transvenous (10%) abdominal groups, but not in the pectoral group. Perioperative mortality occurred only in the epicardial abdominal group, predominantly in patients with concomitant surgery (18%), and in 5% of patients without concomitant surgery. The duration of surgery was significantly shorter for transvenous pectoral implantation (58 +/- 15 min, P < 0.05) compared to transvenous abdominal implantation (115 +/- 38 min). Epicardial abdominal ICD implantation had the longest procedure time (154 +/- 31 min). The postimplant hospital length of stay was significantly shorter for pectoral implantation (5 +/- 3 days, P < 0.05) compared to transvenous (13 +/- 5) and epicardial (19 +/- 5) abdominal implantation. Total hospitalization costs significantly decreased in the pectoral implantation group ($4,068 +/- $2,099 for the pectoral group vs $14,887 +/- $4,415 and $9,975 +/- $3,657 for the epicardial and the transvenous abdominal group, respectively, P < 0.05). These initial results demonstrate the advantage of transvenous pectoral ICD implantation in terms of perioperative complications, procedure time, hospital length of stay, and hospitalization costs.

Mechanical complications after implantation of multiple-lead nonthoracotomy defibrillator systems: implications for management and future system design

Nonthoracotomy lead system (NTL) implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) provide excellent protection against sudden death from ventricular tachyarrhythmias. However, these devices have unique mechanical complications and management issues. We reviewed the major complications occurring in 159 patients who underwent attempted implantation of a multilead NTL system. Successful implantation was obtained in 98% of patients. Two-year, all-cause actuarial survival on an intention-to-treat basis was 94%. Major complications occurred in 28 (17.6%) patients over a follow-up period of 21 +/- 10 months. Complications included 11 (6.9%) lead dislodgements, 10 (5.7%) lead fractures in 9 patients, 2 (1.3%) pocket infections, 1 frozen shoulder, 1 right ventricular perforation, 1 pneumothorax, 1 bleed requiring transfusion, 1 thromboembolism, and 1 "twiddle"-induced torsion of leads. Most of the lead dislodgements and fractures were identified by routine x-ray surveillance. Single-lead systems may significantly reduce complication rates in the future and maintain excellent survival rates.

Predictors of defibrillation energy requirements with nonepicardial lead systems

The determinants of high defibrillation energy requirements (DER) using nonepicardial lead systems (NELS) have not been well characterized. The goal of this study was to examine prospectively the influence of clinical, radiographic, echocardiographic, and procedural variables on DER during NELS placement. Data from 100 consecutive patients undergoing attempted NELS implantation were analyzed. Transvenous leads, subcutaneous patches, and monophasic shock devices from two manufacturers were used. Leads were successfully positioned for testing in 95% of patients. An adequate DER (< or = 25 J) was obtained in 73 of 95 (77%) of patients. Univariate analysis identified amiodarone therapy and left ventricular mass as predictors of high DER. With multivariate analysis, amiodarone therapy was the sole significant predictor of high DER (P = 0.002, odds ratio 5.46). The 22 patients with high NELS DER also had high epicardial DER (mean 24 +/- 9 J). The two patch epicardial DER was > 25 joules in 12 of 22 patients. Thus, adequate DER with monophasic shock waveforms can be obtained in most patients undergoing NELS testing. However, amiodarone therapy significantly increases the probability of obtaining high DER.

Implantation of an automatic defibrillator using a new nonthoracotomy approach

Most current nonthoracotomy systems for defibrillator implantation use monophasic devices. To determine the safety and efficacy of a new nonthoracotomy lead configuration when used in conjunction with a device that used biphasic waveforms, 38 consecutive patients were taken to the operating room for implantation of a Cadence tiered therapy defibrillator system. The lead system consisted of a transvenous coil electrode positioned at the right atrial-superior vena caval junction, a bipolar endocardial right ventricular lead, and a large patch placed subcutaneously near the cardiac apex. Of the 38 nonthoracotomy defibrillator implantations attempted, 36 (95%) were completed with adequate defibrillation thresholds. The mean defibrillation threshold in these 36 patients was < or = 563 +/- 10 V (< or = 20 +/- 1 J). There was no perioperative mortality. Complications included coil lead migration (5), sensing lead migration (1), infection (3), pneumothorax (2), arterial embolism (1), and folding of the subcutaneous patch with an increase in defibrillation threshold (1). No patient died during a median follow-up period of 22 weeks. Fourteen patients (39%) had spontaneous sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias, which were all successfully terminated by the implanted device. Shocks for nonsustained arrhythmias were aborted in eight patients (22%). Spurious discharges for sinus tachycardia or atrial fibrillation occurred in six patients (17%) and were readily diagnosed by examination of the stored electrograms. Thus, implantation of a biphasic tiered therapy defibrillator system using this nonthoracotomy approach is feasible in the majority of patients. The major complication associated with this procedure is lead dislodgment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Experience with two different nonthoracotomy systems for implantable defibrillator in 170 patients

Implantation of a nonthoracotomy system (Medtronic PCD or CPI Endotak) was attempted in 170 patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) not requiring concomitant cardiac surgery. A nonthoracotomy system could be successfully implanted in 95 of the 115 patients with the PCD system and 49 of 55 patients receiving the Endotak lead system. In 26 patients with failed nonthoracotomy system because of defibrillation threshold (DFT) > 25 joules (J), an epicardial system was implanted at the same setting. Patients receiving the two lead systems were comparable with regard to age, sex, and ejection fraction. However, since the PCD system offers tiered therapy multiprogrammable options, all attempts were made to implant this lead system in patients with VT that could be pace terminated. Mean DFT (15 +/- 4.7 vs 17 +/- 4.6 J; P = 0.03) and implant time (2.5 +/- 0.6 vs 3.3 +/- 0.7 hours; P = 0.02) were less with the Endotak lead system. There was no perioperative mortality. During a mean follow-up of 20 +/- 4 months, there were eight instances of lead dislodgment in patients receiving the PCD system. There were four nonsudden cardiac deaths and one sudden death in the Endotak group and three nonsudden deaths in the PCD group. Sudden cardiac death and total survival using the intention-to-treat analysis during this follow-up period were 99% and 95%, respectively. In conclusion, successful implantation, perioperative mortality, and survival rate are comparable with both lead systems; however, incorporating two defibrillating electrodes in one lead minimizes lead dislodgment and reduces implant time.

Underdetection of ventricular tachycardia by algorithms to enhance specificity in a tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillator

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to determine the incidence and clinical significance of underdetection in 125 patients treated with a tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillator, the Medtronic PCD.

BACKGROUND

Underdetection, distinct from undersensing, is a unique, potential complication of new algorithms that enhance specificity in tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillators. These algorithms may delay or prevent recognition of ventricular tachycardia even though electrograms are sensed accurately and RR intervals meet the programmed interval criterion.

METHODS

Underdetection was defined as delay in detection > 5 s at electrophysiologic study or symptomatic delay or detection failure at follow-up of 15 +/- 8 months.

RESULTS

We identified six specific mechanisms of underdetection caused by algorithms to discriminate sustained ventricular tachycardia from sinus tachycardia, atrial fibrillation, ventricular fibrillation and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia. Underdetection caused detection delays in 13 (1.9%) of 677 induced ventricular tachyarrhythmia episodes in 12 patients (9.6%). During follow-up, underdetection occurred in 7 (9.9%) of 71 patients in whom ventricular tachycardia therapies were programmed. Failure to detect ventricular tachycardia occurred in 6 (0.6%) of 988 spontaneous ventricular tachycardia episodes in four patients (5.6%); 2 episodes required external cardioversion. After defibrillator reprogramming, underdetection did not occur.

CONCLUSIONS

Algorithms to enhance specificity cause underdetection of ventricular tachycardia in a significant minority of patients with tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillators. Optimal programming can minimize underdetection.

Clinical outcome of patients with malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias and a multiprogrammable implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implanted with or without thoracotomy: an international multicenter study. PCD Investigator Group

OBJECTIVES

The long-term efficacy and safety of a third-generation implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implanted with thoracotomy and nonthoracotomy lead systems was evaluated in a multicenter international study.

BACKGROUND

The clinical impact of transvenous leads for nonthoracotomy implantation and pacing for bradyarrhythmias and tachyarrhythmias in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems is not well defined.

METHODS

The safety of the implantation procedure and clinical outcome of 1,221 patients with symptomatic and life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias who underwent implantation of a third-generation cardioverter-defibrillator using either a thoracotomy approach with epicardial leads (616 patients) or a nonthoracotomy approach with endocardial leads (605 patients) in a nonrandomized manner was analyzed. The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system permitted pacing, cardioversion, defibrillation, arrhythmia event memory and noninvasive tachycardia induction.

RESULTS

Successful implantation of an endocardial lead system was achieved in 605 (88.2%) of 686 patients and an epicardial system in 614 (99.7%) of 616 (p < 0.05). Perioperative 30-day mortality rate was 0.8% (1.8% including crossovers) in endocardial implant recipients compared with 4.2% (p < 0.001) in epicardial implant recipients (3.6% without crossovers, p < 0.05, respectively). Implantation mortality risk was significantly lower for nonthoracotomy systems irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction or New York Heart Association functional class. Pacing therapies prevented need for cardioversion or defibrillation shocks in 89% of all ventricular tachycardia episodes and were comparably effective for both lead systems. Total survival rate at 2 years was significantly higher in endocardial (87.6%) than epicardial (81.9%) lead recipients (p < 0.001). Elimination of perioperative mortality from the analysis demonstrated comparable survival in both groups (p > 0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Third-generation cardioverter-defibrillators with monophasic waveforms can be successfully implanted with epicardial (99.7%) and endocardial (88.2%) lead systems. We conclude that endocardial leads should be the implant technique of first choice. Improved patient management and tolerance for device therapy is achieved with the addition of antitachycardia pacemaker capability in these systems.

Discrimination of ventricular tachycardia from sinus tachycardia and atrial fibrillation in a tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillator

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted to evaluate criteria for discrimination of ventricular tachycardia from atrial fibrillation and sinus tachycardia in a tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillator (Medtronic PCD).

BACKGROUND

Interval stability algorithms discriminate ventricular tachycardia from atrial fibrillation. Onset algorithms discriminate ventricular tachycardia from sinus tachycardia. Neither has been validated clinically.

METHODS

The stability criterion requires that a ventricular tachycardia interval not vary from any of the three previous intervals by more than the programmable stability value. The onset criterion detects initiation of ventricular tachycardia only if the ratio of an interval to the mean of four previous intervals is less than a programmed onset ratio and either the second or third preceding interval exceeds the ventricular tachycardia detection interval. We evaluated these criteria in 100 patients at electrophysiologic study and exercise testing (65 patients) and during a mean (+/- SD) follow-up of 16.2 +/- 7.9 months. The PCDs were programmed to tiered therapy in 54 patients. In the remaining 46 patients, the PCD's memory for detected ventricular tachycardia was used to study the specificity of the chosen onset criterion for rejecting sinus tachycardia. We used stored intervals preceding appropriate (n = 99) and inappropriate (n = 54) detections to test a new onset criterion that was less sensitive to a single index interval.

RESULTS

Programmed stability of 40 ms decreased detection of induced atrial fibrillation by 95% (20 patients), paroxysmal atrial fibrillation by 95% (6 patients) and chronic atrial fibrillation by 99% (9 patients); all episodes of spontaneous (n = 877) and induced (n = 339) ventricular tachycardia were detected. A programmed onset ratio of 87% rejected sinus acceleration (98%) but caused underdetection of 0.5% of ventricular tachycardias. The onset criterion permitted inappropriate detection of premature ventricular complexes during sinus tachycardia, but the new criterion reduced these inappropriate detections by 98%.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCD's onset and stability criteria reduced inappropriate detection of atrial fibrillation and sinus acceleration while detecting 99.5% of ventricular tachycardias.

Antitachycardia pacing and low-energy cardioversion for ventricular tachycardia termination: a clinical perspective

When incorporated into tiered therapy implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), antitachycardia pacing (ATP) techniques have proved useful for termination of sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardias (VT) and have the advantages of rapid delivery, absence of patient discomfort, and minimal battery drain. The efficacy of low-energy cardioversion (LEC) is similar to that of pacing techniques for VT termination, but LEC has the disadvantages of patient discomfort, atrial proarrhythmia, and greater battery drain compared with ATP. Acceleration of VT occurs with similar frequency with each technique. Neither technique should be used without back-up defibrillation capability in an ICD. VT termination algorithms are currently empiric and require repetitive arrhythmia induction and trials of ATP or LEC. Future studies of the risk and benefits of each technique are likely to define optimal programming strategies in tiered therapy ICDs.

Innovations in pulse generators and lead systems: balancing complexity with clinical benefit and long-term results

Technologic development of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) is now in an exponential growth phase, and many new concepts are being examined. Major innovations have occurred in pulse generators and in lead systems. This may increase ICD use for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Pulse generators now include hybrid pacemaker-defibrillators. Clinical data suggest a need for demand pacing in primary and secondary prevention applications, with antitachycardia pacing being most valuable in the latter group. Atrial leads will allow dual chamber sensing, pacing, and defibrillation. Low energy cardioversion with biphasic shocks can enhance shock efficacy in rapid monomorphic ventricular tachycardia and flutter. Modifications of lead design, biphasic shock waveforms, and optimal thoracic electrode location in axillary or pectoral regions will permit lower energy defibrillation and smaller pulse generators with lower maximum energy outputs of < or = 25 joules. Dual chamber sensing will improve detection of atrial flutter or fibrillation. Minimum data storage requirements for tachycardia events in ICDs still need to be defined. Intracardiac electrogram analysis is still in evolution, and better analytic methods are awaited. Lead system development is likely to support generic pacing and defibrillation catheter electrodes for atrial and ventricular application. Advances in thoracic electrode design are in progress, and a variety of intercostal electrodes are being tested. Improvements in lead design with further impact on defibrillation energy requirements have the potential to permit generator miniaturization. Significant technologic improvements in ICD devices are imminent and should improve clinical results, patient safety, and quality of life.

Role of antitachycardia pacing in patients with third generation cardioverter defibrillators

The most effective antitachycardia pacing (ATP) mode is still a matter of debate. Randomized prospective testing of 3 different ATP modes was performed in 65 patients (pts) prior to and after cardioverter defibrillator implantation (Ventak PRx 36 pts, Cadence V 100 29 pts). All 3 ATP modes included 4 stimulation attempts with 4-7 adaptive scanning burst pulses. Adaptive burst coupling interval was 75% in mode A, 81% in mode B and 69% in mode C. Autodecremental scanning within bursts was 8 msec in all, decremental scanning between bursts was 8 msec in modes B and C. Each ATP mode had to be tested 3 times; all 3 ATP modes were randomly applied to each pt. During preoperative testing 91 of 133 VT episodes (68%) could be terminated by ATP. Termination was achieved in 68% with mode A, 68% with mode B and 73% with mode C. During predischarge testing, 251 VTs were induced and ATP was successful in 147 VTs (59%). Termination rate was 56% with mode A, 68% with mode B and 50% with mode C. During the mean follow-up of 12 months, 2301 arrhythmia episodes (AE) occurred. ATP was performed in 2097 AE (91%) and successful in 1920 AE (92%). Acceleration of VT occurred in 65 AE (3%) and unsuccessful ATP was observed in 112 AE (5%). It is concluded that ATP in general is highly effective in pts with sustained VT. None of the tested ATP modes, however, proved to be superior to the other.

A simplified, single-lead unipolar transvenous cardioversion-defibrillation system

BACKGROUND

Transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators provide significant advantages in the treatment of patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. However, present technology requires considerable electrophysiology expertise, multiple incisions, and long operative times for successful implementation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this study, we present a prototype of a new, easy-to-insert unipolar transvenous defibrillation system that has the reliability of epicardial defibrillation but the ease of pacemaker insertion. This system incorporates a single anodal right ventricular defibrillation electrode using a 65% tilt biphasic pulse delivered to a 108-cm2 surface area pulse generator titanium alloy shell as an active cathode placed in a left infraclavicular pocket. Testing of this system was performed before implantation of a standard nonthoracotomy-transvenous defibrillation system in 40 consecutive patients with a history of ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. The simplified unipolar single-lead system resulted in a defibrillation threshold of 9.3 +/- 6.0 J with 37 of 40 patients (93%) having a defibrillation threshold of less than 20 J. Moreover, the unipolar defibrillation system was efficiently used requiring only 3.4 +/- 0.8 ventricular fibrillation inductions to measure the defibrillation threshold and 100 +/- 28 minutes to implement.

CONCLUSIONS

This new unipolar transvenous defibrillation system is as simple to insert as a pacemaker, requires few ventricular fibrillation inductions, demands less technical expertise, and provides defibrillation at energy levels comparable to that reported with epicardial lead systems. It should substantially reduce the morbidity, time, and cost of defibrillator implantation.

A prospective randomized repeat-crossover comparison of antitachycardia pacing with low-energy cardioversion

BACKGROUND

Multiprogrammable antiarrhythmia devices can treat monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) with autodecremental overdrive pacing and/or with low-energy cardioversion. These two methods provide the opportunity to decrease patient discomfort typically experienced with high-energy pulses. Although both therapies are known to be effective, controversy persists over their relative safety and efficacy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The purpose of this study was to examine the safety and efficacy of autodecremental overdrive pacing and low-energy cardioversion in reproducibly terminating monomorphic VT in 24 patients with multiprogrammable antiarrhythmia devices. The protocol required that identical ECG morphology VT be reproducibly induced four times to assess the outcome of antitachycardia pacing and cardioversion twice for each patient in a randomized fashion. Each episode of VT was induced via the implanted device. Autodecremental overdrive pacing initially began with seven stimuli at 97% of the VT cycle length, decrementing by 10 msec per stimulus to a minimum coupling interval of 200 msec. If ineffective, autodecremental overdrive pacing was allowed to iterate three more times for a total of four pacing interventions. With each iteration, one stimulus was added to the pacing train. Similarly, with low-energy cardioversion, up to four therapeutic attempts were made, beginning with a 0.2-J pulse. If ineffective, pulse energy was increased to 0.4, 1.0, and finally 2.0 J. All interventions were automatic without human interference. VT (cycle length, 306 +/- 42 msec) was repeatedly terminated in 15 of 24 patients (63%) by autodecremental overdrive pacing and in 18 of 24 patients (75%) by low-energy cardioversion (p = 0.53). Eight of the 24 patients (33%) had their VT terminated repeatedly by both therapies. VT accelerated to faster VT or ventricular fibrillation by autodecremental overdrive pacing in four of 24 patients (17%) and by low-energy cardioversion in five of 24 (21%) (p = 0.88). Only one of the 24 patients (4%) accelerated with both therapies. No patient was unaffected by either therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In the manner programmed, autodecremental overdrive pacing and low-energy cardioversion have similar efficacy and acceleration rates. Response to one therapy does not predict response to the other.

Implantable transvenous cardioverter-defibrillators

BACKGROUND

Implantable transvenous cardioverter-defibrillators offer a significant opportunity to decrease procedural morbidity and medical costs in the care of patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias who otherwise would have required a sternotomy or thoracotomy for device insertion. The purpose of this study was to examine prospectively the safety, efficacy, and limitations associated with the use of a transvenously implanted, tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillator with antitachycardia pacing function in a consecutive population of 84 ventricular fibrillation (VF) and sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) survivors.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The index arrhythmia promoting transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator implantation was VF in 41 patients, VT in 27, and both VF and VT in 16. In each patient, transvenous defibrillation via a coronary sinus, a right ventricular, a superior vena caval, and/or a subcutaneous chest patch lead system was attempted. The pulsing methods used include two-electrode single-pathway pulsing or three-electrode dual-pathway simultaneous or sequential pulsing. A transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator was inserted if the defibrillation threshold (DFT) was < or = 20 J. Successful implantation of a transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator was possible in 80 of 84 (95%) patients. The mean implant DFT was 10.9 +/- 4.8 J. After cardioverter-defibrillator implantation, all patients were extubated in the operating room and sent to a standard telemetry ward for monitoring. No patient suffered a postoperative pulmonary complication or perioperative flurry of cardiac arrhythmias. Postoperative complications included lead dislodgments in eight, transient long thoracic nerve injury in one, asymptomatic left subclavian vein occlusion in two, asymptomatic small pericardial effusion in one, subcutaneous patch pocket hematomas in four, pulse generator pocket infection in one, and lead fracture in one. As experience was gained with the procedure, it was routine to discharge patients 3 days after surgery. The mean hospital stay was 6.0 +/- 2.4 days. Upon discharge, all patients returned to their prehospital activities including those with complications except for the patient with a pocket infection, who required intravenous antibiotic therapy. Patient survival using an intention-to-treat analysis was 98% over an 11 +/- 7-month follow-up period. During this time period, 31 of the 80 patients (39%) with transvenous lead systems were successfully treated by their device for sustained VT or VF. Antitachycardia pacing was used in 424 episodes of monomorphic VT and was successful in 371 (88%). All episodes of VF were aborted by the device. Antiarrhythmic drugs were used after device implantation in only eight of 80 patients (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator implantation is practical in most candidates. Implant DFTs are usually low, surgical morbidity and postoperative complications are modest, therapy of VT and VF is efficient, and survival is excellent.

Clinical experience with antitachycardia pacing and improved detection algorithms in a new implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of antitachycardia pacing modes and detection algorithms in patients with a new third-generation implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

METHODS

Twenty-three of 42 consecutive patients had coronary artery disease, 14 had dilated cardiomyopathy, 2 had prior valve replacement and 3 had arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia. The mean ejection fraction was 41 +/- 14%; there were 31 men (74%) and 11 women, with a mean age of 53 years. On the basis of preoperative and postoperative electrophysiologic studies, in 28 patients antitachycardia pacing was postoperatively programmed randomly as "burst" (66%) or autodecremental "ramp" (34%) stimulation with a first coupling interval of 81% of tachycardia cycle length and up to 8 sequences with 3 to 10 stimuli.

RESULTS

During a follow-up interval of 6.3 +/- 2.2 months, 15 patients were treated by antitachycardia pacing for a median of 6 (range 1 to 59) hemodynamically stable ventricular tachycardias (175 +/- 12 beats/min). In 5 patients, 22 ventricular tachycardias (9%) were not terminated by antitachycardia pacing but by cardioversion. Seven (3%) of these episodes accelerated (> 50 ms) during antitachycardia pacing. Syncope did not occur during these episodes. In seven patients initial antitachycardia pacing in cases of supraventricular tachycardias delayed charging and redetection prevented inappropriate discharges. Additional detection algorithms were programmed only after inappropriate therapy. The sudden "onset" and "sustained rate duration" criteria were programmed in three patients and the cycle length "stability" criteria in six patients, respectively. After activation of these detection algorithms only two of the seven patients had further inappropriate device discharges.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, antitachycardia pacing by this implantable cardioverter-defibrillator effectively and appropriately terminated 91% of hemodynamically stable ventricular tachycardias. Inappropriate device discharges were prevented in some patients by antitachycardia pacing and additional detection algorithms.

Risks of developing supraventricular and ventricular tachyarrhythmias after implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator, and timing the activation of arrhythmia termination therapies

The clinical courses of 39 consecutive recipients (mean age 61 +/- 12 years, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction 0.32 +/- 0.15) of an automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) were examined to determine the risks of developing ventricular tachycardia (VT) and supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVT) after surgery, with ventricular response rates fulfilling ICD detection criteria. ICD system leads were implanted by thoracotomy in 25 patients and by using nonthoracotomy lead systems in 14. Six patients (18%) developed SVT after surgery, whereas 14 (36%) developed sustained VT. The median times to the development of both SVT and VT were 2 days. By actuarial analysis, the probability of developing VT after surgery was significantly greater than that of SVT during hospitalization (p = 0.04). This significant excess of postoperative VT over SVT was most marked in patients aged < or = 61 years, those who received nonthoracotomy rather than epicardial lead systems, those who presented with VT rather than ventricular fibrillation, and those who received > 20 intraoperative defibrillation shocks. These observations recommend the activation of ICD therapies immediately after implantation.

Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with high defibrillation thresholds. A multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Successful defibrillation by an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) depends on its ability to deliver shocks that exceed the defibrillation threshold. This study was designed to identify clinical characteristics that may predict the finding of an elevated defibrillation threshold and to describe the outcome of patients with high defibrillation thresholds.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The records of 1,946 patients from 12 centers were screened to identify 90 patients (4.6%) with a defibrillation threshold greater than or equal to 25 J. Excluding three patients who received ICDs that delivered greater than 30 J, there were 81 men and six women with a mean age of 59.5 +/- 10.1 years, a mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.32 +/- 0.14, and a 76% prevalence of coronary artery disease. Sixty-one patients (70%) were receiving antiarrhythmic drugs, and 45 (52%) were receiving amiodarone. Seventy-one patients (82%) received an ICD. Death occurred in 27 patients--19 of the 71 (27%) with an ICD (eight arrhythmic), and eight of the 16 (50%) without an ICD (four arrhythmic). Actuarial survival for all patients at 5 years was 67%. Actuarial survival rates at 2 years for patients with and without an ICD were 81% and 36%, respectively (p = 0.0024). Actuarial survival at 5 years for the ICD patients was 73%; no patient without an ICD has lived longer than 32 months. Actuarial survival free of arrhythmic death in the ICD patients at 5 years was 84%. Although the only variable to predict survival was ICD implantation (p = 0.003), it is entirely possible that in this retrospective analysis, clinical selection decisions to implant or to not implant an ICD differentiated patients destined to have better or worse outcomes, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Antiarrhythmic drug use may be causally related to the finding of an elevated defibrillation threshold. When patients with high defibrillation thresholds receive an ICD, arrhythmic death remains an important risk (42% of deaths in these patients were arrhythmia related, with 16% actuarial incidence at 5 years). Vigorous testing to optimize patch location can potentially benefit patients by enhancing the margin of safety for effective defibrillation.

Efficacy of automatic multimodal device therapy for ventricular tachyarrhythmias as delivered by a new implantable pacing cardioverter-defibrillator. Results of a European multicenter study of 102 implants

BACKGROUND

Third-generation implantable cardioverter-defibrillators are devices designed to treat ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) by means of overdrive pacing, cardioversion, or defibrillation. So far, the efficacy of tiered therapy has been documented only in small series. Therefore, a European multicenter clinical evaluation study of a new tachyarrhythmia control device, the Medtronic PCD pacer-cardioverter-defibrillator with epicardial patch-lead configuration, was undertaken.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We report on 102 patients (mean age, 55 +/- 13 years) from 11 European centers. PCD devices implanted between May 1989 and February 1991 were included. The patients suffered from hemodynamically significant ventricular tachyarrhythmias not suppressed by antiarrhythmic drug therapy and unrelated to acute myocardial infarction; one patient had nonsustained VT and severely depressed left ventricular function. Seventy patients had coronary artery disease with old myocardial infarctions, 23 had cardiomyopathies of various etiologies, and nine patients had no detectable heart disease. Mean ejection fraction was 36 +/- 14% (range, 10-76%). Mean intraoperative defibrillation threshold (51 patients) was 10.6 +/- 5.1 J (range, 2-18 J). The documented follow-up ranged from 1 to 21 months (mean, 9.4 +/- 5.8 months), or 79.9 cumulative patient-years. Perioperative mortality was 3.9%. The actuarial survival rate at 12 months was 91%. One sudden arrhythmic death occurred. Sixty patients (58%) received device therapy. Seventeen patients had therapies only for "VF" episodes, 16 patients only for VT, and 28 patients for VT and "VF" episodes. Based on device memory data, 1,235 spontaneous VT episodes were detected and treated in 43 patients. Twelve hundred four of these VT episodes received painless initial antitachycardia pacing therapy, restoring sinus rhythm in 91%. The 108 ongoing episodes received 209 multiple therapeutic attempts. Eighty-five additional overdrive pacing therapies restored sinus rhythm in 30%. Initial ineffective antitachycardia pacing therapies received 51 cardioversion pulses. The success rate was 61%. Seventy-three additional cardioversion pulses were delivered to backup ineffective pacing therapy as well as ineffective secondary cardioversion pulses. Their success rate was only 40%. Two hundred eighty-six spontaneous episodes were detected in 44 patients as "VF." Overall defibrillation efficacy was 97.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

The implanted device nearly eliminates sudden arrhythmic death in patients with documented, potentially fatal ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Automatic tiered therapy is highly effective to restore sinus rhythm, provided that an integrated two-zone tachycardia detection algorithm is used, assigning lower tachycardia rates to overdrive pacing and/or cardioversion and higher tachycardia rates to defibrillation. In general, spontaneous VTs can be terminated by automatic overdrive pacing, and painful or disturbing countershock therapies are not required to terminate the majority of spontaneous VT episodes.

Clinical experience with a tiered-therapy, multiprogrammable antiarrhythmia device

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this report is to describe our initial experience with a tiered-therapy, variable detection criteria, multiprogrammable antiarrhythmia device capable of antitachycardia pacing, cardioversion, and defibrillation in 50 cardiac arrest survivors.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An epicardial lead system was used in 35 patients. A transvenous lead system was used in 15 patients. The index arrhythmia leading to device implantation was ventricular fibrillation (VF) in 23 patients, ventricular tachycardia (VT) in 21 patients, and both VT and VF in six patients. Postoperatively, all 50 patients benefited from the additional functions available in the new device compared with a device capable only of high-energy termination of arrhythmias using a simple rate detection algorithm. Total patient survival over a mean follow-up period of 15 +/- 5 months was 96%, with no patient succumbing to sudden arrhythmic death, cardiac death, or surgical death. Nine patients (18%) avoided the need for a bradycardia pacemaker because of the device's backup bradycardia pacing function. A programmable tachycardia cycle length stability algorithm prevented inappropriate device intervention into atrial fibrillation in 11 patients (22%). Detection schema flexibility, antitachycardia pacing capabilities, and low-energy cardioversion options allowed the elimination or avoidance of antiarrhythmic drugs in 41 patients (82%). Device data storage facilitated troubleshooting and reprogramming of detection algorithms and therapeutic schema in all 50 patients. Finally, the ability to perform noninvasive programmed electrical stimulation obviated the need for invasive cardiac catheterization in 35 of 35 patients who required electrophysiological testing after device implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that a multiprogrammable antiarrhythmia device can provide a substantial advance in the treatment of patients with disabling or life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias by minimizing the use of painful shocks, reducing the need for antiarrhythmic drugs, lowering the incidence of inappropriate shocks, facilitating electrophysiological evaluation, and obviating the need for dual-device therapy.

Antitachycardia devices: realities and promises

Nonpharmacologic therapy for ventricular arrhythmias has gained growing attention with the development of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. In addition, the reports of adverse effects of drug therapy from several studies, including the Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST), have supported the need for these devices. The development of new implantable cardioverter-defibrillators that have the capability of antitachycardia pacing, bradycardia pacing, cardioversion and defibrillation has enhanced their clinical utility. The currently available implantable cardioverter-defibrillators have been shown to significantly improve survival after sudden cardiac arrest in patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Newer devices with expanded capabilities may reduce mortality even further. In this report the features of currently available antitachycardia devices and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators are reviewed and the features and current implant data on newer antitachycardia devices are discussed.