Changes in the amplitude of endocardial electrograms following defibrillator discharge: comparison of two lead systems

QT dispersion significantly increases after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether QT dispersion (QTd), a noninvasive electrocardiographic parameter of ventricular tachyarrhythmia risk assessment, is changed by implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks delivered during implantation process, to analyze the duration of these changes, and to further evaluate the effect of amiodarone on these parameters.

METHODS

Twenty-six consecutive patients who are scheduled to undergo ICD implantation for aborted sudden cardiac death or documented symptomatic sustained ventricular tachycardia were enrolled into the study. A simultaneous 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) was recorded after the ICD implantation just before starting the testing shock when the patients were under general anesthesia (baseline record) and at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, 25th, and 30th minutes after the successful shocks. RR interval, QT interval, corrected QT interval (QTc), QTd, and corrected QTd (QTcd) were all measured and calculated on ECG.

RESULTS

At 1st minute after the successful shock, an abrupt increase (from 67.0 +/- 13.8 ms to 94.8+/-21 ms, P < 0.0001) was observed in QTcd, which was followed by a gradual return to the preshock values at 20th minute. Analysis of patients with and without long-term oral amiodarone treatment showed that in amiodarone-pretreated patients QTcd returned to the baseline value earlier than in patients without amiodarone treatment (15 minutes vs 20 minutes, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

ICD shocks cause an increase in QTcd lasting for up to 20th minute, which may predominate in some important clinical problems like electrical storm. Amiodarone, with the desirable effect on QTcd, may reduce the proarrhythmic effects of ICD shocks.

Total Failure to Sense Ventricular Fibrillation with Inappropriate Defibrillator Sensitivity Adjustment

Automatic Sensitivity Control, unique to St. Jude defibrillators, allows for programmable sensitivity threshold and refractory periods. However, inappropriate programming can lead to marked undersensing and potentially lethal complications. We report a case of complete failure to sense ventricular fibrillation with inappropriate sensitivity adjustments. Detailed review of the parameters with induction of ventricular fibrillation must be performed to assure adequate safety.

Effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks on QT dispersion

Following transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks, a significant increase in QT dispersion was observed. We suggest shock-induced increased dispersion of myocardial repolarization as one of the mechanisms of shock-induced proarrhythmia.

Detection of ventricular fibrillation by transvenous defibrillating leads: integrated versus dedicated bipolar sensing

INTRODUCTION

Dedicated bipolar sensing has been suggested to be safer than integrated bipolar sensing due to an increased incidence of failure to redetect ventricular fibrillation after an unsuccessful shock with leads that use integrated bipolar sensing. We compared sensing characteristics during ventricular fibrillation of simultaneously recorded dedicated and integrated bipolar electrograms.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty patients undergoing transvenous defibrillator implantation with a Transvene lead were studied. Simultaneous recordings were made from the dedicated bipole and the integrated bipole from the distal tip to the coil (interelectrode distance 18.3 mm). The mean detection time and number of undetected beats for the initial episode of ventricular fibrillation were 2804 +/- 569 msec and 0.9 +/- 0.8 using the dedicated recordings and 2938 +/- 546 msec and 1.4 +/- 1.1 (P = 0.026) using the integrated recordings. The mean redetection times and number of undetected beats following a failed first shock (n = 13) were 2468 +/- 225 msec and 0.8 +/- 1.1 for the dedicated recordings and 3042 +/- 498 msec (P < 0.0003) and 4.2 +/- 4.2 (P < 0.005) for the integrated recordings. Frequency analysis of the ventricular fibrillation electrograms demonstrated that the signal energy in the dedicated electrograms was significantly greater than the energy in the integrated electrograms (P < 0.0001). There was a significant negative relationship between detection times and the ventricular fibrillation signal energy. There was no independent effect of recording type (dedicated versus integrated).

CONCLUSION

There are only minor differences in detection/redetection of ventricular fibrillation between dedicated and integrated (with tip to coil spacing of 18.3 mm) recording configurations. Detection times during ventricular fibrillation are related to the signal variance or energy recorded. Differences in the sensing performance of the two recording configurations can be explained by the differences in signal energy between the dedicated and integrated recordings that occur during ventricular fibrillation.

Early postoperative rise in defibrillation threshold in patients with nonthoracotomy defibrillation lead systems: attenuation with biphasic shock waveforms

INTRODUCTION

In patients with non-thoracotomy defibrillation lead (NTL) systems coupled with monophasic shock waveforms, the defibrillation threshold (DFT) rises early after implantation. There is little information regarding features predictive of the DFT rise, or DFT changes early after implantation of NTL systems coupled with biphasic shock waveforms.

METHODS AND RESULTS

DFT measurements were performed serially at implantation, prior to hospital discharge (mean 4 +/- 3 days), and at follow-up (mean 49 +/- 22 days) in 146 patients with an NTL system. Factors were assessed for association with a "clinically important" early postimplantation DFT rise, defined as a rise of > or = 2 energy steps (2 to 4 J per step; > or = 5 J total). A clinically important early postimplantation DFT rise occurred in 48 patients (33%). Univariate predictors of the rise included the monophasic shock waveform, the Medtronic Transvene lead system, the presence of a subcutaneous defibrillation patch, and the number of shocks delivered during the implantation procedure. However, the only independent predictor of a clinically important DFT rise was the monophasic shock waveform (F = 18, P < 0.001). For the monophasic patient group (n = 79), the incidence of a DFT rise was 53% (n = 42). For the biphasic patient group (n = 67), the incidence of a DFT rise was 9% (n = 6). The clinical characteristics of the monophasic and biphasic groups were not significantly different, nor were their DFTs at implantation. Among a subgroup of 18 consecutive patients who underwent serial DFT testing utilizing both monophasic and biphasic waveforms, the incidence of a clinically important DFT rise with monophasic (n = 9,50%) was higher than with biphasic shocks (n = 3,17%; P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

NTL systems coupled with biphasic shock waveforms have an attenuated incidence of a clinically important DFT rise early after implantation, relative to patients with NTL systems coupled to monophasic waveforms.

Local electrogram changes in response to a high-voltage intracardiac shock in humans

INTRODUCTION

Transvenous defibrillators may have difficulty sensing ventricular fibrillation following an unsuccessful shock. This study was undertaken to characterize the changes that occur in intracardiac electrograms following a defibrillator shock that may contribute to the failure to redetect arrhythmias.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Unipolar and bipolar electrogram recordings were made during sinus rhythm before and following monophasic and biphasic test shocks delivered in random order through a single lead defibrillator system in 15 patients. An additional 14 patients received only a biphasic shock. Electrogram amplitude, dV/dt, and activation recovery time were determined. Following biphasic shocks, unipolar electrogram amplitude decreased by a mean of 19.6% and the bipolar amplitude by a mean of 20.8% (P = NS). The mean dV/dt in the unipolar recordings decreased by 30.7% and in the bipolar recordings decreased by 33.0% (P = NS). Time constants for recovery were approximately 60 seconds. Reduction in dV/dt was greater when the shocking coil was closer to the distal sensing electrode. There was no significant influence of shock waveform (monophasic vs biphasic), recording type (unipolar vs bipolar), or clinical variables on the change in electrogram characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Changes in intracardiac electrograms following defibrillator shocks through transvenous leads are seen with shocks delivered in sinus rhythm and may be related to the proximity of the shocking coil to the distal sensing electrode.