Dual chamber arrhythmia detection in the implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Temporal patterns of premature atrial complexes predict atrial fibrillation occurrence in bradycardia patients continuously monitored through pacemaker diagnostics

The frequency of premature atrial complexes (PACs) has been related with atrial fibrillation (AF) occurrence and adverse prognosis. Research objective was to evaluate whether temporal patterns of PACs are directly associated with AF onset in pacemaker patients with continuous monitoring of the atrial rhythm. Overall, 193 pacemaker patients (49% female, 72 ± 9 years old), enrolled in a national registry, were analyzed. Frequency of daily PACs was measured in a 14-day initial observation period, during which patients were in sinus rhythm. In the following period, temporal occurrence and frequency of daily PACs and eventual onset of AF were derived by pacemaker diagnostics. In the run-in period, median PACs frequency was 614 PACs/day (interquartile range 70-3056). Subsequently, in a median follow-up of 6 months, AF occurred in 109 patients, in particular in 37/96 (38.5%) patients with a PAC rate < 614 PACs/day and in 72/97 (74.2%) patients with PAC rate ≥ 614 PACs/day (p < 0.001). In patients with AF occurrence, the number of daily PACs, normalized by dividing for the average of PACs in ten preceding days, progressively increased in the 5 days preceding AF. Cox model predictive analysis showed that the risk of AF was significantly higher in patients with a relative increase of the daily PACs higher than 30% compared with PACs average number in ten preceding days [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) 3.67 (2.40-5.59), p < 0.001]. PACs frequency increases in the 5 days preceding AF onset. A relative increase of the daily PACs is significantly associated with the risk of AF occurrence.

Single-brand dual-chamber discriminators to prevent inappropriate shocks in patients implanted with prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a propensity-weighted comparison of single- and dual-chamber devices

PURPOSE

Comparisons of the efficacy of dual- vs. single-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in preventing inappropriate shocks have had contradictory results. We investigated whether dual-chamber devices have a lower risk of inappropriate shocks and the specific role of supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) discriminators.

METHODS

All heart failure (HF) patients without an indication for pacing and implanted with a prophylactic ICD were recruited from the nationwide multicenter UMBRELLA registry. Arrhythmic events were collected by remote monitoring and reviewed by a committee of experts.

RESULTS

Among 782 patients, single-chamber ICDs were implanted in 537 (68.7%) and dual-chamber devices in 245 (31.3%). During a mean follow-up of 52.2 ± 24.5 months, 109 inappropriate shocks were delivered in 49 patients (6.2%). In the propensity-score-matched analysis, dual-chamber ICDs were related to lower rates of inappropriate shocks as compared to single-chamber devices (0.9% vs. 11.8%, p = < 0.001, log-rank test). In multivariable Cox proportional analysis, independent predictors of inappropriate shock were history of atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.78, CI 1.37-5.64, p = 0.004), chronic kidney disease (HR = 6.15, CI 2.82-13.53, p < 0.001), and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (HR = 2.84, CI 1.54-5.23, p = 0.001). Among ICD settings, PR logic was the only discriminator independently related to a reduced risk of inappropriate shocks (HR = 0.18, CI 0.06-0.48, p = 0.001), along with an SVT limit enabled over 200 bpm (HR = 0.24, CI 0.11-0.51, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide cohort of primary prevention ICD-only patients, dual-chamber devices were related to lower risk of inappropriate shocks compared to single-chamber ICDs. Besides, PR logic and SVT limit > 200 bpm emerged as protective factors.

ICD discrimination of SVT versus VT with 1:1 V-A conduction: A review of the literature

Inappropriate ICD shocks are associated with increased mortality. They also impair patients' quality of life, increase hospitalizations, and raise health-care costs. Nearly 80% of inappropriate ICD shocks are caused by supraventricular tachycardia. Here we report the case of a patient who received a single-lead dual-chamber sensing ICD for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death and experienced inappropriate ICD shocks. V-A time, electrogram morphology, and response to antitachycardia pacing suggested atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia, which was confirmed in an electrophysiology study. Inspired by this case, we performed a literature review to discuss mechanisms for discrimination of supraventricular tachycardia with 1:1 A:V relationship from ventricular tachycardia with 1:1 retrograde conduction.

Incidence and clinical relevance of uncontrolled ventricular rate during atrial fibrillation in heart failure patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

Uncontrolled ventricular rate (VR) during atrial fibrillation (AF) may cause clinical deterioration in heart failure (HF) patients who need continuous biventricular pacing to achieve cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We aimed at evaluating the association between AF, uncontrolled VR, and sub-optimal CRT, defined as low biventricular pacing percentage (BIVP%).

METHODS AND RESULTS

All 1404 patients had HF, New York Heart Association (NYHA) ≥II, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%, and QRS ≥120 ms, and received an implantable CRT defibrillator (CRT-D). Occurrence of AF, VR during AF and lifetime BIVP% were estimated from device data. Ventricular rate during AF was defined as uncontrolled in patients with mean VR>80 bpm and maximum VR>110 bpm. Over a median follow-up of 18 months, AF was detected in 443 of 1404 patients (32%). In this sub-group of AF patients, VR during AF was uncontrolled in 150 of 443 patients (34%). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that age [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.00-1.06, P= 0.028], and uncontrolled VR [HR = 1.69 (CI = 1.01-2.83), P= 0.046] were the only independent predictors of clinical outcome, assessed by HF hospitalizations and death. The median lifetime BIVP% was 95% (25-75 percentile range 91-99%). Biventricular pacing percentage was significantly and inversely correlated to VR, decreasing by 7% for each 10 bpm increase in VR. Sub-optimal CRT, defined as BIVP% <95%, was predicted by the occurrence of persistent or permanent AF [odds ratio (OR) = 3.77, CI = 2.44-5.82, P< 0.001], and uncontrolled VR [OR = 2.25, CI = 1.35-3.73, P= 0.002].

CONCLUSION

Uncontrolled VR occurs in one-third of CRT-D patients, who experience AF, and is associated with HF hospitalizations and death and with sub-optimal CRT (lifetime BIVP%<95%).

Tools and strategies for the reduction of inappropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have been shown to provide a survival benefit in patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death. A major problem associated with ICD therapy is the occurrence of inappropriate shocks which impair patients' quality of life and may also be arrhythmogenic. Despite recent technological advances, the incidence of inappropriate shocks remains high, thus posing a challenge that we have to meet. In the present review we summarise the available tools and the strategies that can be followed in order to reduce inappropriate ICD shocks.

Incidence and Significance of Far-Field R Wave Sensing in a VDD-Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

BACKGROUND

A VDD-implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) provides atrioventricular (AV) synchronous stimulation when necessary and incorporates the advantages of dual chamber arrhythmia discrimination algorithms both at potentially lower costs and less periprocedural complications than a DDD-ICD system. A prerequisite for correct dual chamber ICD function is reliable atrial sensing.

METHODS

We evaluated atrial near- and ventricular far-field sensing and its impact on the dual-chamber detection algorithm in 106 patients with a single-lead VDD-ICD during a 12-month follow-up period.

RESULTS

Six hundred and thirty-nine follow-ups were included. Mean near-field amplitude was 3.82 +/- 1.76 mV; mean far-field amplitude was 0.31 +/- 0.15 mV. 46% of patients had far-fields >0.35 mV and 35% of patients showed atrial EGM markers corresponding to a ventricular far-field in at least one follow-up. Six hundred and forty-five tachycardia episodes were evaluated. Due to far-field sensing, three of 66 episodes (4.5%) of sinus tachycardia were misclassified as ventricular tachycardia (VT), leading to antitachycardia therapies. Delayed detection of VT was seen in a 12 of 323 episodes (3.7%) in five of 62 patients (8%) having VT events (delay 6.4 +/- 6.0 seconds (range 2-24 seconds)). Stable far-field amplitudes <0.2 mV in a follow-up had a high negative predictive value for the occurrence of malfunction during tachycardia-conversely, high far-field amplitudes or a high incidence of far-field markers are only moderately correlated with malfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

Ventricular far-field sensing in a VDD-ICD is not uncommon, however, tachycardia detection by the dual chamber algorithm is not seriously impaired by far-field sensing.

Inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator discharges unrelated to supraventricular tachyarrhythmias

AIMS

The development of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) with QRS morphology discrimination and dual-chamber sensing capabilities has improved the differentiation of supraventricular from ventricular tachycardias (VTs). Inappropriate ICD discharges may result from extracardiac signals caused by electromagnetic interference (EMI), because of electric fields and leakage currents from domestic or medical electrical devices, damaged sensing leads, and various cardiac and extracardiac signals that mimic VT and/or ventricular fibrillation. The aim of our study was to determine retrospectively the incidence and clinical relevance of these ICD behaviours and offer possible therapeutic solutions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We have observed inappropriate discharges unrelated to supraventricular arrhythmias in 13 (3.9%) of the 336 patients implanted with ICDs in our centre from 1989 to 2005. Seven patients received inappropriate shocks following exposure to external EMI: improperly grounded electric stove, electrically powered watering system, hydro-massage bath, electrical pruner, electrocautery current during cardiac surgery, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation. In four patients, spurious discharges were related to internal noise of the ICD system from inappropriate lead connections. In two cases, erroneous antitachycardia therapy was delivered following different body signals oversensing (T-wave oversensing, wide QRS double-counting and myopotentials). In nine patients, non-invasive solutions prevented further inappropriate therapies (avoidance of EMI, malfunctioning atrial lead exclusion, ventricular sensing reprogramming). In four patients, surgical revision of the system was required (lead connections or position revision).

CONCLUSION

In our experience, inappropriate ICD discharges unrelated to supraventricular arrhythmias occurred in about 4% of ICD patients. A careful evaluation of clinical data and telemetric information (lead impedance, sensed R-wave, stored electrograms) is essential in order to understand the nature of inappropriate ICD discharges and to select the most appropriate solution.

Inappropriate ICD Therapy: Does Device Configuration Make a Difference

INTRODUCTION

Inappropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy (IT) is a common complication in patients with ICD. IT is commonly triggered by supraventricular tachycardias (SVT). Dual chamber ICDs (D-ICDs) may distinguish SVT from ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation better than single chamber ICDs (S-ICDs) and may be associated with a smaller incidence of IT.

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of 386 patients who had an ICD implanted for an AHA class I indication. Intracardiac electrograms were used to classify shocks as either appropriate or inappropriate.

RESULTS

Of 295 patients with an S-ICD, 66 (22.3%) received IT, compared to 5 (5.4%) of 91 patients with a D-ICD. The likelihood of being event-free at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years was 96.1%, 96.1%, 96.1%, and 89% for patients with D-ICD and 80.7%, 72.7%, 69.6%, and 66.4%, respectively, for patients with S-ICD (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed no significant association with age, sex, history of atrial fibrillation, history of hypertension, or ejection fraction. SVTs were the commonest cause of IT in our patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients with D-ICD are less likely to receive IT as compared to patients with S-ICD.

The Rhythm ID Going Head to Head Trial (RIGHT): Design of a Randomized Trial Comparing Competitive Rhythm Discrimination Algorithms in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

BACKGROUND

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has become primary therapy for the prevention of sudden death. One of the major morbidities of ICD use remains inappropriate therapy for supraventricular arrhythmias (SVA). Detection enhancements have increased therapy specificity, but their impact on inappropriate therapy is not well studied. Moreover, ICD manufacturers have developed unique algorithms to meet this goal, with no previous clinical direct comparisons. RIGHT is a randomized, prospective study that will assess the differential efficacy of ICDs from two different manufacturers. It is the first trial to compare directly competitive ICD rhythm discrimination algorithms on a large scale.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study is to assess arrhythmia discrimination in Guidant versus Medtronic ICDs by comparing the time to first inappropriate therapy after the predischarge visit.

METHODS

The study will enroll approximately 2,000 patients in 100 centers. Patients will be randomized to Guidant or Medtronic using a permuted block design, stratified by center and by single/dual chamber device types. Patients will receive a commercially available Guidant VITALITY 2 family ICD with Rhythm ID or a Medtronic ICD using the Enhanced PR Logic or Wavelet discrimination algorithms, and will be followed according to the schedule shown until a common closing date with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. All events will be reviewed by an independent committee to determine the appropriateness of rhythm classification and therapy delivery.

CONCLUSION

RIGHT is the first randomized, large scale, head-to-head comparison of ICD discrimination algorithms.

A trial design for evaluation of empiric programming of implantable cardioverter defibrillators to improve patient management

The delivery of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is sophisticated and requires the programming of over 100 settings. Physicians tailor these settings with the intention of optimizing ICD therapeutic efficacy, but the usefulness of this approach has not been studied and is unknown. Empiric programming of settings such as anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) has been demonstrated to be effective, but an empiric approach to programming all VT/VF detection and therapy settings has not been studied. A single standardized empiric programming regimen was developed based on key strategies with the intention of restricting shock delivery to circumstances when it is the only effective and appropriate therapy. The EMPIRIC trial is a worldwide, multi-center, prospective, one-to-one randomized comparison of empiric to physician tailored programming for VT/VF detection and therapy in a broad group of about 900 dual chamber ICD patients. The trial will provide a better understanding of how particular programming strategies impact the quantity of shocks delivered and facilitate optimization of complex ICD programming.

Safety and Efficacy of a Dual Chamber Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Capable of Slow Ventricular Tachycardia Discrimination:

New developments in dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) have increased the specificity of therapy delivery. This study was performed to examine the performance of an algorithm, focusing on its ability to distinguish slow ventricular tachycardia (VT) from sinus rhythm or supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. The patient population included 77 men and 13 women, 63 +/- 11 years old, treated with ICDs after episodes of spontaneous or inducible ventricular tachyarrhythmias. They were randomized to programming of the ICD to a lower limit of VT detection at 128 beats/min (group I, n = 44), versus 153 beats/min II (group II, n = 46). The primary endpoint of the study consisted of comparing the specificity and sensitivity of the algorithm between the two groups of patients. Over a 10.1 +/- 3.5 months follow-up, 325 episodes were detected in the Tachy zone in group I, versus 106 in group II. The sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm in group I were 98.8% and 94.4%, respectively, versus 100% and 89% in group II (NS). A single episode of VT at a rate of 132 beats/min was diagnosed as SVT in group I. The sensitivity and specificity of the algorithm for tachycardias <153 beats/min were 97.4% and 94.5%, respectively. Overall VT therapy efficacy was 100% in both groups. The performance of this algorithm in the slow VT zone supports the programming of a long Tachy detection interval to document slow events, and allows to treat slow VT, if necessary, without significant risk of inappropriate interventions for sinus tachycardia.

Do atrial tachyarrhythmias beget ventricular tachyarrhythmias in defibrillator recipients?

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to analyze the incidence of "dual tachycardia"-ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) preceded by paroxysmal atrial tachycardia (AT) or atrial fibrillation (AF)-in patients receiving dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).

BACKGROUND

Paroxysmal AT/AF occurs commonly in patients who receive ICDs for the treatment of life-threatening VT/VF. Although AF is associated with an adverse prognosis in the setting of structural heart disease, the relationship between AT/AF and VT/VF is unclear.

METHODS

We followed 537 patients undergoing implantation of the Jewel AF ICD (Model 7250, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) for 11.4 +/- 8.2 months. These included 398 patients with a history of at least two episodes of AT or AF during the preceding year as well as 139 patients enrolled because of VT/VF alone.

RESULTS

There were 233 dual tachycardia episodes in 45 patients during follow-up. Overall, 8.9% of episodes detected as VT/VF were dual tachycardias, and 20.3% of patients with VT/VF had at least one dual tachycardia episode. The median duration of AT/AF preceding the first VT/VF detection was 1.09 h (25% to 75% quartile 0.24 to 33.4 h). When AT/AF continued between two consecutive VT/VF detections, the median interdetection interval was 11 min. When AT/AF terminated either because of a ventricular therapy or spontaneously, the median interdetection interval was prolonged to 71 h (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Dual tachycardia is common in ICD recipients with a history of AT/AF. The duration of AT/AF preceding the first VT/VF detection is < or =1 h about 50% of the time. Termination of the AT/AF significantly delays the time to the next VT/VF detection.

Advances in implantable cardioverter defibrillators

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have become an important therapeutic modality for patients who have had a cardiac arrest or are at risk for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Clinical trials have confirmed the role of the ICD for patients with sustained ventricular arrhythmias and have expanded the indications to include patients with coronary artery disease, left ventricular dysfunction, nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, and inducible ventricular tachycardia. Numerous technologic advances in ICDs have resulted in decreased size, greater ease of placement, and increased functionality. Important advancements have been made in the effectiveness of arrhythmia classification and electrogram storage. Dual-chamber ICDs have become increasingly sophisticated with rate-adaptive sensors. Biventricular pacing is being combined with ICD function in patients with heart failure, systolic dysfunction, and QRS widening. Future advances in devices will likely lead to improved arrhythmia classification, more advanced automated features, and additional features including more sophisticated sensors and biventricular pacing systems.