Bipolar transvenous defibrillation: efficacy of two different positions of the anode

Short- and long-term performance of a tripolar down-sized single lead for implantable cardioverter defibrillator treatment: a randomized prospective European multicenter study. European Endotak DSP Investigator Group

A new, thinner (10 Fr) and more flexible, single-pass transvenous endocardial ICD lead, Endotak DSP, was compared with a conventional lead, Endotak C, as a control in a prospective randomized multicenter study in combination with a nonactive can ICD. A total of 123 patients were enrolled, 55 of whom received a down-sized DSP lead. Lead-alone configuration was successfully implanted in 95% of the DSP patients vs 88% in the control group. The mean defibrillation threshold (DFT) was determined by means of a step-down protocol, and was identical in the two groups, 10.5 +/- 4.8 J in the DSP group versus 10.5 +/- 4.8 J in the control group. At implantation, the DSP mean pacing threshold was lower, 0.51 +/- 0.18 V versus 0.62 +/- 0.35 V (p < 0.05) in the control group, and the mean pacing impedance higher, 594 +/- 110 omega vs 523 +/- 135 omega (p < 0.05). During the follow-up period, the statistically significant difference in thresholds disappeared, while the difference in impedance remained. Tachyarrhythmia treatment by shock or antitachycardia pacing (ATP) was delivered in 53% and 41%, respectively, of the patients with a 100% success rate. In the DSP group, all 28 episodes of polymorphic ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation were converted by the first shock as compared to 57 of 69 episodes (83%) in the control group (p < 0.05). Monomorphic ventricular tachycardias were terminated by ATP alone in 96% versus 94%. Lead related problems were minor and observed in 5% and 7%, respectively. In summary, both leads were safe and efficacious in the detection and treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. There were no differences between the DSP and control groups regarding short- or long-term lead related complications.

Effect of implantable cardioverter/defibrillator lead placement in the right ventricle on defibrillation energy requirements. A combined experimental and clinical study

OBJECTIVES

The effect of implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) lead placement in the right ventricle (RV) on defibrillation efficacy has not been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, the goal of this combined experimental and clinical study was to evaluate the effect of a septal and a non-septal position of the right ventricular endocardial spring lead on defibrillation energy.

METHODS

In 12 isoflurane-anaesthetized swine and subsequently in 8 patients who underwent ICD implantation, two different positions of the distal spring lead in the RV were investigated in randomized order: non-septal position (free wall of the RV) and septal position (interventricular septum). For each position, separate 50% probability determinations of energy (E50), peak voltage (V50) and peak current (A50) were calculated using the three reversal up/down defibrillation procedure. The E50, V50, A50 and impedance (I) were averaged and compared using the two-sided t-test for paired samples.

RESULTS

Both the experimental study and the clinical study demonstrated that placing the distal defibrillation lead near to the septum rather than near to the ventricular free wall resulted both in the swine and in the patients in significantly lower E50-31.6%/ - 37.1%, V50-16.1%/-20.9% and A50 -10.0%/ - 24.2%, respectively. Defibrillation impedances were significantly reduced only in the experimental study.

CONCLUSIONS

Defibrillation efficacy depends on the position of the distal spring electrode in the RV. A septal position significantly reduces the energy requirements compared to a non-septal position. The decrease in energy requirements might be explained by an increase in current flow through the septum and the posterolateral wall of the left ventricle. reserved

Antiarrhythmic therapy--future trends and forecast for the 21st century

This article discusses recent changes in antiarrhythmic therapy, with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapy (electrode catheter ablation, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators [ICDs]), and puts them into perspective for the coming years. The treatment of supraventricular tachycardias and tachycardia involving accessory pathways is likely to remain the domain of catheter ablation. With promising new techniques under investigation, the spectrum of arrhythmias that can be cured will probably be expanded. Treatment of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias is likely to remain the domain of the ICD in the foreseeable future. With the safety net of the ICD in place, new antiarrhythmic drugs or other forms of antiarrhythmic therapy can be developed and tested.

Influence of anodal electrode position on transvenous defibrillation efficacy in humans: a prospective randomized comparison

Nonthoracotomy lead systems for implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have reduced operative mortality and morbidity as compared to epicardial lead systems but are usually associated with higher defibrillation thresholds (DFTs). The purpose of this prospective randomized trial was to investigate if the second defibrillation electrode in the left subclavian vein can increase defibrillation efficacy and decrease DFT as compared to the superior vena cava (SVC) position in nonthoracotomy lead systems for ICDs. Seventeen patients (mean age: 49.9 +/- 11.3 years, mean ejection fraction: 46.1% +/- 15.8%) were implanted with an investigational unipolar electrode (Medtronic 13001) used as the defibrillation anode. DFT testing was started in the SVC (n = 10, group A) or the left subclavian vein (n = 7, group B), and repeated in the alternative position starting at the DFT of the initial position. Fifteen patients were eligible for analysis (group A: n = 9, group B: n = 6). With the electrode in the SVC, ventricular fibrillation could be successfully terminated in 9 out of 15 patients (60%). In the left subclavian vein the success rate was 100% (P < 0.01). Mean DFT in the SVC was 13.0 +/- 5.2 J and in the left subclavian vein 10.2 +/- 4.9 J. DFTs in the left subclavian vein were either lower (group A: n = 5/9, group B: n = 5/6) or equal to the results in the SVC position (P < 0.001). Thus, the left subclavian vein appears to be a superior alternative for positioning of the defibrillation anode as compared to the SVC for nonthoracotomy lead systems using two separate leads.

[Influence of waveform and configuration of electrodes on the defibrillation threshold of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators]

The defibrillation threshold (DFT) is no threshold in the true sense. Between energy levels which defibrillate in all cases and energy levels which never defibrillate, a broad range of energies exists which might or might not defibrillate. Thus, the value of the DFT is dependant on the protocol used for its determination. Usually the DFT presents an energy at which the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) will defibrillate successfully at a rate of approximately 75%. To achieve a 100% success rate the energy has to be programmed 15 J above the DFT or twice the DFT.Using DFT measurements the energy needed for internal defibrillation could be gradually reduced in the last years. Major break throughs have been the introduction of the biphasic defibrillation waveform and the use of pectorally implanted ICD shells as defibrillation electrodes. The shortening of the defibrillation impulse by the use of lower capacitances could not improve DFTs but allowed to construct ICDs of smaller volume. Addition of a superior vena cava electrode or a subcutaneous array electrode at the left lateral chest to the standard bipolar electrode system (right ventricle, pectoral ICD can) allowed for tri- and quadripolar lead configurations which reduced DFTs on average only slightly but reduced the standard deviation of DFTs significantly and thus helped to avoid high DFTs. Besides building smaller ICDs, reduction of DFTs and thus programming of lower defibrillation ICD energies allows for improved battery longevities and reduced capacitor charging times and thus a lower incidence of syncopes.