Safety of external cardioversion/defibrillation in patients with internal defibrillation patches and no device

Anesthetic Implications for Patients With Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators have become one of the preferred methods for treating many life- threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Many tens of thou sands of these devices have been implanted and this, together with the ease of worldwide travel, has made it more likely that anesthesiologists everywhere may come into contact with these patients either for elective or emergency surgery. These patients present unique anesthetic challenges because of the combination of the device and severe underlying cardiac disease. This article presents an overview of the implantable defibril lator as it affects the anesthesiologist, including device function, device assessment, electromagnetic interfer ence, and perioperative management.

Novel Electrode Design for Potentially Painless Internal Defibrillation Also Allows for Successful External Defibrillation

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) save lives, but the defibrillation shocks delivered by these devices produce substantial pain, presumably due to skeletal muscle activation. In this study, we tested an electrode system composed of epicardial panels designed to shield skeletal muscles from internal defibrillation, but allow penetration of an external electric field to enable external defibrillation when required.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Eleven adult mongrel dogs were studied under general anesthesia. Internal defibrillation threshold (DFT) and shock-induced skeletal muscle force at various biphasic shock strengths were compared between two electrode configurations: (1) a transvenous coil placed in the right ventricle (RV) as cathode and a dummy can placed subcutaneously in the left infraclavicular fossa as anode (control configuration) and (2) RV coil as cathode and the multielectrode epicardial sock with the panels connected together as anode (sock-connected). External DFT was also tested with these electrode configurations, as well as with the epicardial sock present, but with panels disconnected from each other (sock-disconnected). Internal DFT was higher with sock-connected than control (24 +/- 7 J vs. 16 +/- 6 J, P < 0.02), but muscle contraction force at DFT was greatly reduced (1.3 +/- 1.3 kg vs. 10.6 +/- 2.2 kg, P < 0.0001). External defibrillation was never successful, even at 360 J, with sock-connected, while always possible with sock-disconnected.

CONCLUSION

Internal defibrillation with greatly reduced skeletal muscle stimulation can be achieved using a novel electrode system that also preserves the ability to externally defibrillate when required. This system may provide a means for painless ICD therapy.

New-generation lithotripters for treatment of patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator: experimental approach and review of literature

PURPOSE

The influence of shockwaves applied during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy on the function of implantable cardioverter defibrillators was evaluated. Mechanical influences as well as proper electrical function were tested in an experimental approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two implantable defibrillators (Ventak Mini 1743 and AVII 1821) were exposed to the shockwaves of a new-generation lithotripter. Each of the antidysrhythmic devices was tested at several distances from and within the focus of the lithotripter. All studies were performed with maximum energy and the number of shockwaves used for stone treatment. The devices were connected to an ECG simulator, and continuous recording of a surface ECG, a shock ECG, and marker channel was performed.

RESULTS

No macroscopic and microscopic mechanical damage was observed. The detection function of the implantable defibrillators was not altered by any electromagnetic artifacts even when brought into the focus of the shockwaves. All induced ventricular dysrhythmias were terminated properly regarding artifact sensing. However, after defibrillation, the pacing function of the Ventak Mini cardioverter defibrillator, which was programmed into the demand mode, failed. In this case, there was no post-shock pacing in the period of post-defibrillation asystole. The failure was caused by artifact oversensing.

CONCLUSION

In patients with implanted cardiac devices undergoing treatment with a new-generation lithotripter, deactivation of the defibrillator is not mandatory. For safety reasons, continuous ECG recording is recommended. To avoid pacing failure by artifact oversensing, the shockwaves should be applied in a R-wave synchronous mode.

Emergencies related to implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have become the dominant therapeutic modality for patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. ICDs are implanted using techniques similar to standard pacemaker implantation. They not only provide high-energy shocks for ventricular fibrillation and rapid ventricular tachycardia, but also provide antitachycardia pacing for monomorphic ventricular tachycardia and antibradycardia pacing. Devices incorporating an atrial lead allow dual-chamber pacing and better discrimination between ventricular and supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. Intensivists are increasingly likely to encounter patients with ICDs. Electrosurgery can be safely performed in ICD patients as long as the device is deactivated before the procedure and reactivated and reassessed immediately afterward. Prompt and skilled intervention can prove to be life-saving in patients presenting with ICD-related emergencies, including lack of response to ventricular tachyarrhythmias, pacing failure, and multiple shocks. Recognition and treatment of tachyarrhythmia can be temporarily disabled by placing a magnet on top of an ICD. The presence of an ICD should not deter standard resuscitation techniques. Multiple ICD discharges in a short period of time constitute a serious situation. Causes include ventricular electrical storm, inefficient defibrillation, nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, and inappropriate shocks caused by supraventricular tachyarrhythmias or oversensing of signals. ICD system infection requires hardware removal and intravenous antibiotic therapy. Deactivation of an ICD with the consent of the patient or relatives is reasonable and ethical in terminally ill patients.

Direct current cardioversion: indications, techniques, and recent advances

Direct current cardioversion/defibrillation is an important part of the intensivist's armamentarium. Emergent application may be lifesaving. Elective cardioversion should be used cautiously, with attention to patient selection and proper techniques. Repetitive, futile attempts at direct current cardioversion should be avoided. Reducing or eliminating arrhythmia precipitants may be safer and more effective than this more dramatic intervention.

Comparison of early and late complications in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery with and without concomitant placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Previous studies have reported a significant morbidity and mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in conjunction with the placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) with an epicardial lead system. In the absence of a control group, how significantly the component of concomitant placement of the ICD system contributes to these untoward outcomes remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to assess the short- and long-term complications in patients undergoing CABG surgery in conjunction with the placement of an ICD with epicardial leads and to compare these complications with those of patients who had only CABG surgery (control group). The study group (group A) consisted of 56 patients who underwent CABG surgery and placement of an ICD pulse generator with epicardial leads. A control group (group B) consisted of 56 patients who underwent CABG surgery only during the same time period. The two groups were matched for age, sex distribution, left ventricular function, surgical approach, number of bypass grafts per patient, bypass pump time, and length of follow-up period. The early mortality for group A was 7.1% versus 1.8% for group B (p > 0.05). The incidence of early morbidity (congestive heart failure, infection, supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias) for groups A and B was similar (26.8% vs 25.0%, p > 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Safety and diagnostic yield of noninvasive ventricular stimulation performed via tiered therapy implantable defibrillators

Extensive electrophysiological testing is critical for the effective utilization of sophisticated tachycardia detection and termination algorithms available in tiered therapy ICDs. To evaluate the safety and diagnostic yield of electrophysiological testing via noninvasive ventricular stimulation, we performed 294 electrophysiological studies in 154 patients (age 65 +/- 10; left ventricular ejection fraction 0.36 +/- 0.15) with tiered therapy ICDs. Stimulation was performed under methohexital anesthesia. A total of 918 sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias were induced (3.1 +/- 2.5 per procedure): monomorphic VT, 550; ventricular flutter, 74; and VF, 246. The results of invasive and noninvasive programmed stimulation were compared for 79 patients who had both studies under similar treatment. Overall concordance was 83%, and did not differ significantly between patients who had the noninvasive stimulation via epicardial or endocardial pacing leads. VF could be induced in 206 of 257 studies (82%), and it was less likely to be induced in patients on amiodarone (74% vs 85%; P = 0.02), or beta blockers (55% vs 83%; P = 0.017). No patient presented a serious complication. Minor complications occurred during 39 studies: transient laryngospasm in 1, unintended delivery of an ICD shock to a conscious patient in 4; induction of sustained atrial fibrillation in 8; need for external rescue defibrillation shocks in 13; and delivery of inappropriate shocks for supraventricular rhythms in 14 studies. Noninvasive ventricular stimulation performed under methohexital anesthesia is safe. Its diagnostic yield compares favorably with that of conventional electrophysiological studies. VF can be induced in a majority of patients. There is good correlation between invasive and noninvasive programmed stimulation for induction of VT. Noninvasive ventricular stimulation may emerge as standard procedure for the initial programming and follow-up of ICDs.

Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing one- or two-stage strategies for myocardial revascularization and implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation

Internal defibrillation leads were placed at time of coronary revascularization in 79 patients. In 34, an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) was placed simultaneously (group I). A two-stage strategy (selective implantation of the ICD in patients with postoperative spontaneous or inducible ventricular tachycardia [VT]) was followed in 45 patients (group II). Group I patients had failed more antiarrhythmic drug trials (2.9 +/- 1.6 vs 1.5 +/- 1.6; P = 0.02), including amiodarone (62% vs 20%; P less than 0.001). There were four operative deaths in each group. Postoperatively, VT was present in 27 group II patients (60%), 25 of whom received an ICD (two refused device implantation). Patients with postoperative VT had a lower left ventricular ejection fraction than those without VT (33 +/- 9 vs 47 +/- 16; P = 0.01). Actuarial survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 88 +/- 6, 88 +/- 7, and 88 +/- 10 in group I; and 83 +/- 6, 76 +/- 7, and 76 +/- 11 in group II (NS). No patient without an ICD (based on the postoperative electrophysiological study [EPS]) died suddenly. Five patients (6%) had ICD system infection. Sudden death was largely prevented by either strategy, but relatively high rates of operative mortality and ICD system infection were observed. Prospective studies should identify patients more likely to benefit from one or another strategy.