Oversensing and inappropriate shock in a patient with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator: What is the mechanism?

Reduction of inappropriate shock rate through signal filtering (smart-pass) in patients with implantable subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICD) are effective in protecting patients against sudden death but expose them to a higher risk of inappropriate shock (IAS). We performed a systematic search of studies published between January 2010 and December 2019 assessing IAS due to cardiac oversensing by the selection process (PRISMA) and identified 17 eligible articles. Fifteen studies were observational, and two studies were retrospective. For the meta-analysis, the final population included 6111 patients: 3356 without SMART pass (SP) filter (group 1) and 2755 with SP filter (group 2). 1614 shocks (appropriate shocks plus IAS) were registered (1245 in group 1 and 369 in group 2). The random effects meta-analysis estimated an overall IAS rate of 7.78% (95% confidence interval: 4.93-10.64) with substantial variability between studies (I square=96.05%, p<0.001). The IAS rate was 10.75% (95% confidence interval: 8.49-13.02) for group 1 and 3.61% (95% confidence interval: 1.36-5.86) for group 2 (p<0.001). Third-generation S-ICD technology with SP filters reduced the risk of cardiac signal-related IAS.

Oversensing caused by trapped air in the header of subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator generator

In this study, we report two cases with oversensing due to air accumulation in the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) device generator header. If trapped air in the header of the device is suspected, the re-connection procedure should be considered or the primary vector must be used, which might prevent oversensing.

Air entrapment as a potential cause of early subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator malfunction: a systematic review of the literature

AIMS

Air entrapment (AE) has been reported as a potential cause of early inappropriate shocks (ISs) following subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation, but a cause-effect relationship is not always evident. This systematic review aims to analyse this phenomenon concerning implantation techniques, electrogram (EGM) features, radiologic findings, and patient management.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar databases following the PRISMA guidelines to obtain all available literature data since 2010 on S-ICD malfunctions possibly due to AE. The final analysis included 54 patients with AE as a potential cause of S-ICD malfunction. Overall, the aggregate incidence of this condition was 1.2%. Of ICD malfunctions possibly due to AE, 93% were ISs, and 95% were recorded within the first week following implantation. Radiologic diagnosis of AE was confirmed in 28% of the entire study cohort and in 68% of patients in whom this diagnostic examination was reported. At the time of device malfunction, EGMs showed artefacts, baseline drift, and QRS voltage reduction in 95, 76, and 67% of episodes, respectively. Management included ICD reprogramming or testing, no action (observation), and invasive implant revision in 57, 33, and 10% of patients, respectively. No recurrences occurred during follow-up, irrespective of management performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Device malfunction possibly due to AE may occur in ∼1% of S-ICD recipients. Diagnosis is strongly suggested by early occurrence, characteristic EGM features, and radiologic findings. Non-invasive management, principally device reprogramming, appears to be effective in most patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Magnet Use to Temporarily Inhibit Inappropriate Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy in Emergency Situations: A Case Report

Introduction: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) represents a major advancement in ICD technology. Inappropriate shocks (IAS) occur in more than 3.1% of the population with S-ICD each year and are usually followed by admission to the emergency department (ED). In this setting, the disabling of IAS is mandatory during a pseudo-electrical storm (ES). This report describes the strategies that can be followed in order to temporarily inhibit IAS in critical care settings with the use of magnets.

Case presentation: An S-ICD was implanted more than 6 weeks prior to presentation in a 68-year-old man with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. In the ED, the patient experienced 3 IAS in the last hour. A Medtronic magnet was applied to stop IAS, as the specific programmer was not available. The maneuver interrupted the IAS. In order to verify the universal magnetic response of the S-ICD, six different magnets and one smartphone with MagSafe technology were tested. All magnet models suspended arrhythmia detection and IAS, while the smartphone did not cause magnet interferences.

Conclusions: This report demonstrates the safety and efficacy of all clinical magnet models in inhibiting IAS. In case of pseudo-ES, any type of magnet allows ED providers to easily and rapidly disable the functionality of the devices when appropriate.

Complications involving the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: Lessons learned from MAUDE

BACKGROUND

Reports on the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) cumulatively demonstrate a low rate of complications, but clinical experience with this technology is limited compared with transvenous devices.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe and analyze S-ICD complications reported to the Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database.

METHODS

We reviewed all S-ICD events reported to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience submitted over 24 months (from February 2016 through February 2018) through a prospective and standardized approach at a time when an estimated 15,000 S-ICDs were in service.

RESULTS

After removing duplicate entries and nonclinical events (n = 493), 1604 events remained. A total of 542 instances of infection were reported with system removal in 414/542 (77.5%). Inappropriate shocks occurred in 550 patients, and 382 (69%) were attributed to oversensing; in response, 254 (56%), 147 (33%), and 80 (18%) patients underwent system reprogramming, removal, or revision, respectively. There were 15 deaths, and causes included defibrillation failure during follow-up (n = 2), ventricular fibrillation induced by the device (n = 4), device-device interaction resulting in undersensing (n = 1), procedure-related complications (n = 4), and uncertain etiology (n = 4). There were 137 reports of system migration, and in 57 (42%) of these, there were associated inappropriate shocks. System migration events were managed with a combination of system revision (69 [51%]), reprogramming (25 [18%]), and system removal (44 [32%]).

CONCLUSION

Several S-ICD complications have been reported that appear to be related to the ICD's design and function over time. A better understanding of these complications may help inform patient selection, implant technique, and postimplantation management.