Differences in the pathological changes in dogs' hearts after defibrillation with extrapericardial paddles and implanted defibrillator electrodes

Gross and microscopic pathological changes associated with nonthoracotomy implantable defibrillator leads

BACKGROUND

Although the effects of epicardial implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads on underlying cardiac tissue have been reported, the gross and microscopic changes associated with endocardial ICD leads are less well described. This study describes the gross and microscopic changes associated with endocardial ICD leads in humans.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The hearts from 8 patients were examined. At the time of ICD implantation, the patients' mean age was 47+/-11 years, and the left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.24+/-0.10. Four patients had ischemic heart disease, and 4 had dilated cardiomyopathy. Five hearts were examined after transplantation; 3, after death. The electrode-myocardial interfaces were characterized by intense endocardial fibrosis and were remarkably consistent. Each lead was encased by a ring of fibroelastic tissue, and there was fibrosis of the right ventricular myocardium adjacent to the leads. Fibrosis involved the tricuspid valve in 5 patients, and 1 had perforation of the valve by the lead. Microscopically, interstitial fibrosis was adjacent to each lead in the current path of ICD shocks. Acute cell injury was present only in the hearts that had received recent shocks.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICD electrode-myocardial interface is characterized by intense fibrosis. The fibrosis associated with endocardial ICD leads and the cumulative acute damage produced by defibrillation discharges may explain changes in the defibrillation and pacing thresholds and the difficulty of lead extraction that can be encountered with transvenous ICD systems.

Clinical evaluation of the safety of repetitive intraoperative defibrillation threshold testing

One goal of the initial implantation procedure for a cardioverter defibrillator is determination of the configuration and patch location with the lowest defibrillation threshold (DFT). To determine the safety of multiple defibrillation tests, an analysis of the intraoperative defibrillation threshold tests (DFTT) in our patients was performed. In 84 patients, the mean number of DFT trials was 5.27; the mean number of joules received was 275.0. The maximum number of shocks in one implant procedure was 50 for a total of 4,895 joules without complications. Four patients received 30 or more DFT shocks without complication. There were two complications related directly to the DFTT: one patient with severe noninflammatory cardiomyopathy developed electromechanical dissociation and was subsequently resuscitated and survived; the second patient with severe triple vessel coronary artery disease suffered an intraoperative myocardial infarction during testing and eventually died 22 days postoperatively. All patients received an ICD unit; six patients had DFTs of greater than 20 joules. Based on our experience, we followed the clinical status (heart rate, blood pressure, ECG changes, fluid status, total anesthesia time) during the DFTT to determine the extent and duration of our testing protocol. Multiple shocks due to repositioning of the leads in a stable patient should not prohibit extensive testing as adverse consequences do not appear to be cumulative.