Decreasing Pain and Anxiety Associated with Patient-Activated Atrial Shock: A Placebo-Controlled Study of Adjunctive Sedation with Oral Triazolam

Intracardiac atrial defibrillation

Intravascular ventricular defibrillation and intravascular atrial defibrillation have many similarities. An important factor influencing the outcome of the shock is the potential gradient field created throughout the ventricles or the atria by the shock. A minimum potential gradient is required throughout the ventricles and probably the atria in order to defibrillate. The value of this minimum potential gradient is affected by several factors, including the duration, tilt, and number of phases of the waveform. For shock strengths near the defibrillation threshold, earliest activation following failed shocks arises in a region in which the potential gradient is low. The defibrillation threshold energy can be decreased by adding a third and even a fourth defibrillation electrode in regions where the shock potential gradient is low for the shock field created by the first two defibrillation electrodes and giving two sequential shocks, each through a different set of electrodes. However, the addition of more electrodes and sequential shocks complicates both the device and its implantation. Because patients are conscious when the atrial defibrillation shock is given, they experience pain during the shock, which is one of the main drawbacks of intravascular atrial defibrillation. Unfortunately, the pain threshold for defibrillation shocks is so low that a shock less than 1 J is uncomfortable and is not much less painful than shocks several times stronger. Therefore, even though electrode configurations exist that have lower atrial defibrillation threshold energy requirements than the atrial defibrillation threshold with standard defibrillation electrode configurations used in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for ventricular defibrillation, they are not clinically practical because their shocks are almost as painful as with the standard ICD electrode configurations. Such electrode configurations would make the ICD more complicated, leading to greater difficulty and longer time required for implantation.