Significance of Supraventricular Tachyarrhythmias in Patients with Implanted Pacing Cardioverter Defibrillators

Eighty-six patients were treated with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) because of sustained ventricalar tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). In 27 patients an epicardial system was used, in 59 patients a transvenous system with a subcutaneous patch electrode was implanted. During a mean follow-up time of 17 ± 9 months, inappropriate activations of the ICD due to supraventricular tachycardia were documented by Holter monitoring in 14 patients (16%). In 8 patients paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), in 2 patients chronic AF, in 1 patient atrial flutter, and in 3 patients sinus tachycardia triggered antitachycardia pacing functions (12 patients) or internal defibrillation (2 patients). In 3 patients (5%) VT was induced by inappropriate antitachycardia pacing. In an additional 18 patients (21%) inappropriate activation of antitachycardia functions due to atrial tachyarrhythmias were suspected based on telemetry readouts or the patient's history. Inappropriate activation of ICD therapy triggered by intermittent supraventricular tachyarrhythmias is common. Further improvements of detection algorithms for supraventricular tachycardia are required in future device generations.     

The Combined Transvenous Implantation of Cardioverter Defibrillators and Permanent Pacemakers

We developed criteria for implantation and programming of permanent endocardial pacemakers in patients with a nonthoracotomy ICD system. These criteria were prospectively used in 10 patients who recieved an ICD prior to (n = 5) or following (n = 5) implantation of a dual chamber (n = 6) or ventricular (n = 4) pacemaker with a unipolar (n = 4) or bipolar (n = 6) lead configuration. All patients were tested for interactions or malfunctions. Undersensing of ventricular fibrillation by the atrial sense amplifier and inadequate atrial pacing occurred in one patient with a unipolar dual chamber system programmed to AAIR but didn't impair ICD sensing. Transient or permanent loss of capture or sensing of the pacemaker was not observed after ICD shocks with the output programmed to double pulse width and voltage of stimulation threshold and the sensitivity to 50% of the detected R wave. One episode of transient reprogramming occurred without clinical consequences. One unipolar ventricular pacemaker lead had to be exchanged against a bipolar lead because of oversensing of the pacing artifact by the ICD. There was no failure of an ICD to detect ventricular arrhythmias due to inadequate pacemaker activity. During a follow-up period of 21 ± 11 months, a total of 78 ventricular arrhythmias were effectively treated in six patients. Thus, a combined use of transvenous ICD and pacemaker is possible despite the close vicinity of pacing and defibrillations leads. Optimized programming different to the common settings is required. As interactions occurred only in unipolar pacemaker leads bipolar systems should be used in these patients.     

Device Interaction—Antitachycardia Pacemakers and Defibrillators for Sustained Ventricular Tachycardia

We evaluated the combined use of permanent automatic antitachycardia pacemakers and implanted defibrillators in fen patients with recurrent monomorphic sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT). Pacemaker programming was VVI-T automatic burst in eight patients, VVI-T magnet mode in one patient, and VVI in one patient. Device interactions occurred in four patients, requiring changes in pacemaker programming. These included defibrillator multiple counting during pacing, in-appropriate pacemaker bursts initiating VT, inappropriate reset of the pacemaker antitachycardia mode by defibrillation, defibrillator discharge after pacemaker VT termination, and defibrillator VT reinitiation. Two patients required pacemaker programming out of the antitachycardia mode, and two required a change in antitachycardia pacing parameters. Seven patients remain in automatic VVI-T and three in VVI modes. Mean follow-up is 13 months and all patients are alive. Thus, although pacemaker/ defibrillafor combinations function well for patients with more than one VT rate, device interactions occur frequently and may require pacemaker reprogramming or elimination of the overdrive mode. Combined use of these devices should be cautiously considered when single device therapy is unsatisfactory. Devices that combine both pacing and defibrillation features may reduce adverse interaction.     

Electrocardiographically Documented Unnecessary, Spontaneous Shocks in 241 Patients With Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

The incidence and cause of electrocardiographically documented spontaneous implantuble Cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) discharges for a rhythm other than ventricular tachycardia (VT) or fibrillation (VF) (unnecessary shocks) were determined in 241 patients who underwent ICD implantation between March 1983 and November 1991. During follow-up of 24 ± 20 months, 54 of 241 patients (22%) received a total of 132 unnecessary ICD shocks confirmed by Holler or telemetry monitoring or stored electrograms (Egs) from the ICD. The rhythm preceding these unnecessary ICD shocks was atrial fibrillation in 30 patients, sinus or supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) in 11 patients, antitachycardia pacing triggered by atrial fibrillation or SVT resulting in VT in 5 patients, nonsustained VT in 3 patients, and normal sinus or pacemaker rhythm in 10 patients. Unnecessary ICD discharges occurred most frequently during the first week after implantation or generator replacement (18 of 54 patients [33%]). Unnecessary ICD discharges could be documented more often by stored Egs in patients with devices with Eg storage capability (Ventritex Cadence(tm), 19 of 54 patients [35%]) than by Holter or telemetry monitoring in patients with devices without Eg storage capabilities (34 of 193 patients [18%], P < 0.01), despite a shorter mean follow-up duration of 14 ± 9 months versus 26 ± 21 months, respectively. Only six of 54 patients (11%) in whom unnecessary ICD discharges occurred had recurrent unnecessary shocks during 22 ± 20 months of follow-up after treatment directed at the cause of the first episode or device reprogramming to preclude non-VT rhythm detection. In conclusion, unnecessary ICD shocks are a frequent complication of ICD therapy occurring in at least 22% of patients. The cause of these shocks is most frequently atrial fibrillation with a rapid ventricular response. The availability of Eg storage capabilities facilitates the diagnosis of the electrical event precipitating inappropriate ICD shocks. Diagnosis of the cause of unnecessary shocks allows for the institution of therapy that may reduce the risk for subsequent events.     

The Impact of Antitachycardia Pacing with Defibrillation

Chronic recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) can be reproducibly terminated by programmed endocardiaJ right ventricular stimulation. However, antitachycardia pacing can be associated with possible acceleration of VT, while frequent episodes of VT and patient discomfort can limit treatment by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The combined use of antitachycardia pacing and the AICD (automatic implantable cardioverier defibrillator) was evaluated in 6 out of 51 patients (age 57 ± 11 years) in whom the AICD had been implanted because of recurrent VT. In each instance VT could be terminated by temporary overdrive pacing. The interactive mode of VT termination by a pacemaker (Tachylog) as well as by the AICD was assessed after implantation. In the automatic mode, the Tachylog functioned as a bipolar, ventricular inhibited (VVI) device with antitachycardia burst stimulation capability, allowing two to five stimuli at intervals of 260–300 ms and one or two interventions. During follow-up of 47 ± 24 months, the Tachylog terminated VT reliably 50–505 times per patient. When burst stimulation accelerated VT, termination was achieved by AICD discharge. Thus, drug resistant VT can be terminated by antitachycardia pacing to avoid patient discomfort. In the event of tachycardia acceleration, VT was terminated by the AICD. A universal pacemaker-defibrillafor should combine antibradycardia and antitachycardia pacing with back-up cardioversion defibrillation.     

Preliminary Clinical Experience with the First Dual Chamber Pacemaker Defibrillator

The lack of specificity of VT detection is a significant shortcoming of current ICDs. In a French multicenter study, 18 patients underwent implantation of the Defender 9001 (ELA Medical), an ICD utilizing dual chamber pacing and arrhythmia detection. Over a mean follow-up period of 7.1 ± 4.5 months, 176 tachycardia episodes recorded in the device memory were analyzed, and physician diagnosis was compared with that by the device. All 122 VT/VF episodes were correctly diagnosed, as were 51 of 53 supraventricular tachyarrhythmias. Two episodes of AF with rapid regular ventricular rates were treated as VT, and a third episode, treated as VT, could not be diagnosed with certainty. A dual chamber pacemaker defibrillator offers improved diagnostic specificity without loss of sensitivity, in addition to the hemodynamic benefit of dual chamber pacing. (PACE 1997;20     

Radiofrequency Ablation of Atrial Flutter and Atrial Tachycardias in Patients with Permanent Indwelling Catheters

The presence of chronic indwelling leads in the area targeted for RF ablation may pose a technical challenge and reduce the chance of success of the ablation. In addition, application of lesions in close proximity to pacemaker leads or other permanent catheters could affect their function. Fourteen patients referred for RF ablation of atrial flutter/fibrillation and atrial tachycardia, who had a permanent dual chamber pacemaker (10 patients), ICD (1 patient), or both (3 patients) were studied to assess the safety, efficacy, and effects of the ablative procedure on device function. Lead impedance, R and P wave amplitude, and pacing threshold of the defibrillator and pacemaker were measured before and after ablation. The procedure was successful in all patients. In one patient who underwent both atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation ablation, the atrial pacing threshold increased from 1.0 preablation to 2.0 V postablation. No P wave was detectable after ablation. In another patient, the P wave amplitude went from 4.0 to 2.0 mV postablation. In both patients the device converted to the power reset mode. No changes were observed in the remaining patients. Postablation defibrillator testing showed no malfunction. Follow-up reinterrogation of the devices revealed no alterations. In conclusion: (1) RF ablation of atrial flutter and/or tachycardia is feasible even in patients with multiple chronic atrial and ventricular indwelling catheters; and (2) RF applications in close proximity of defibrillator and pacing catheters does not appear to alter their function unless lesions are produced in the area surrounding the distal pacing electrode.     

Combined Third-Generation Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator with Permanent Unipolar Pacemakers: Preliminary Observations

As implantable Cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are strictly contraindicated in the presence of unipolar pacemakers, currently available options in patients having such chronic pacing systems include: abandoning the implanted pacemaker and selecting an ICD with ventricular demand (VVI) pacing; or replacing the chronic (dual chamber) unipolar pacing system with a dedicated bipolar version prior to ICD implantation. In three patients with previously implanted unipolar pacemakers, we challenged the premise that all ICD systems are incompatible by combining with a third-generation transvenous ICD system (Medtronic 7217B PCD® incorporating true bipolar sensing, a self-limiting auto-adjusting sensitivity, and a tolerant VF detection algorithm. The potential for pace-maker-ICD interaction was minimized by separating the tip of the ICDs transvenous right ventricular pace/sense-defihrillation coil lead from that of the chronic pacemaker lead by > 2–3 cm, and by performing “worst case” intraoperative testing. Although ICD double-counting of the dual chamber pacemaker's atrial and ventricular pacing spikes could be provoked at extreme high output settings, it did not occur at clinically appropriate settings. More importantly, continuous high output asynchronous pacing during ventricular fibrillation (VF) did not interfere with ICD detection. During a mean follow-up period of 18 months, one patient has had VF appropriately terminated bv the ICD. In the remaining two patients, proper VF detection and ICD function was reassessed at 3 months and/or at 1 year during noninvasive testing. Conclusion: These preliminary findings demonstrate that this transvenous ICD system's VF sensing and detection features combined with careful implant technique, rigorous “worst case” testing for possible pacemaker-ICD interaction with regular follow-up, may permit implantation of this ICD system in patients with chronic unipolar pacing systems. Further studies are needed to validate the long-term clinical safety of this promising revised approach to a currently contraindicated device combination.     

Long-Term Efficacy of an Antitachycardia Pacemaker and Implantable Defibrillator Combination

Antitachycardia pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) were implanted in 14 patients to control recurrent hemodynamically stable ventricular tachycardia (VT), All patients underwent extensive preimplant testing in the elecrrophysiology laboratory documenting that in each patient at least 50 episodes of VT could be reliably terminated by an external model of the antitachycardia pacemaker. The burst scanning mode of anfitachycardia pacing was used in all patients. ICDs were implanted solely as a back up should acceleration of VT occur, and all had high nonprogrammable rate cutoffs (mean 191 ± 12 beats/min). During a mean follow-up of 25 ± 6 months, 6,029 episodes of VT were treated in the 14 patients. Only 103 ICD discharges were required (approximately one discharge per 60 episodes of VT). Ten of the 14 patients received discharges from their ICDs. No deaths have occurred. All devices remain active and in the automatic mode. Thus, an antitachycardia pacemaker and ICD combination can safely and effectively terminate VT in highly selected patients who are subjected to extensive preimplant testing. In such patients, the vast majority of episodes of VT can be terminated with antitachycardia pacing, and only rarely is a discharge required from the ICD.     

Effects of High Energy Shocks on Pacing Impedance During Transvenous ICD Implantation

The purpose of the current study was to characterize the effects of transvenous ICD shocks on myocardial impedance. Rather than recording impedance during shocks, it was measured during continuous pacing in order to minimize confounding effects such as electrode polarization. Pacing impedance (reflecting the combined impedances of the electrode-tissue interface, myocardium, and blood pool) was measured every 5 seconds before and after 58 single shocks in 22 patients undergoing ICD implantation with a Transvene (n = 14) or Endotak (n = 8) lead. There was a progressive and long-lasting decrease in impedance after shocks. The magnitude of this change was similar for 0.6-J test shocks and shocks ≥ 5 J (28 ± 32 Ω vs 23 ± 16 Ω P = 0.8). However, the drop in impedance was more abrupt after high energy shocks. Because impedance continued to decline throughout the 5-minute interval between shocks, successive shocks had a cumulative effect, with a decrease of 46 ± 42 Ω after four discharges. In conclusion, a progressive decline in pacing impedance is a characteristic response to transvenous ICD discharges.     

Automatic Implantable Cardioverter/ Defibrillator (AICD) and Antitachycardia Pacemaker (Tachylog): Combined use in Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias

Antitachycardia pacing in ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT) is associated with potential acceleration of VT: frequency of VT and discomfort of the patient (pt) can limit treatment with the AICD. We therefore evaluated the combined use of antitachycardia pacing and AICD in 6 of 14 patients (age 50–70. mean 60 years) with AICD implantation because of VT, which could he terminated by temporary overdrive pacing. With the interactive mode of the Tachylog, termination of VT by the pacemaker as well as by the AICD was assessed after implantation. In the automatic mode, the Tachylog functioned as a bipolar VVI device with antitachycardia burst stimulation: 2–5 stimuli, interval 260–300 ms. 1–2 interventions. During follow-up of 12±5 months, the Tachylog terminated VT reliably 20 to 327 times per patient. In three patients, burst stimulation accelerated VT, which was terminated then by the AICD discharge. Conclusion: Drug resistant ventricular tachyarrhythmias can be terminated by the Tachylog pacemaker avoiding patients' discomfort. In case of acceleration. ventricular tachyarrhythmias can be controlled by the automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator. A universal pacemaker should combine antitachycardia pacing with back-up defibrillation mode.     

Long-Term Thrombosis after Transvenous Permanent Pacemaker Implantation

To assess the efficacy of prophylactic administration of anticoagulant and antiaggregant drugs to prevent venous thrombosis after long-term transvenous permanent pacemaker implantation, venograms were performed in 100 consecutive patients at the elective replacement of the pacemaker. Mean follow-up period after initial transvenous permanent pacemaker implantation was 6.0 years. The venograms demonstrated normal in 77 patients. The remaining 23 venograms showed venous stenosis in 11 patients and total obstruction in 12 patients. Twenty-one of these 23 patients had venous collateral circulation. No difference was found in the incidence of venous abnormalities according to the route of entry, the lead insulation, the total number of the implanted leads, and anticoagulant and antiaggregant drugs. All these patients have remained asymptomatic. In conclusion, the incidence of venous thrombosis after long-term transvenous pacing is 23% and the causes of venous thrombosis may be endothelial trauma and underlying venous stenosis. As this article describes a retrospective limited study, we cannot find the efficacy of prophylactic administration of anticoagulant and antiaggregant drugs to prevent venous thrombosis formation after transvenous permanent pacemaker implantation. Further prospective study will be needed to assess the efficacy of prophylactic administration of anticoagulant and antiaggregant drugs.     

Ventricular Fibrillation Induction Using Nonsynchronized Low Energy External Shock During Rapid Ventricular Pacing: Method of Induction When Fibrillation Mode of ICD Fails

Third-generation implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are frequently implanted with non-thoracotomy systems and provide noninvasive methods for electrical stimulation and ventricular fibrillation induction. These modalities facilitate postoperative testing of the ICD. Rapid right ventricular burst pacing via the defibrillator is commonly used for initiation of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. However, with the available third-generation devices, ventricular fibrillation (VF) induction may be impossible in up to 19% of the patients. In these cases, transvenous placement of a right ventricular catheter has been required to generate VF and appropriately evaluate the device. We report a new technique of noninvasive induction of VF using a low energy external nonsynchronized shock delivered during ICD fibrillation induction pacing. In three patients, after all efforts to induce VF by the Ventritex Cadence V-100 had failed, a 20 J nonsynchronized shock was delivered during rapid RV pacing. This resulted in VF on the first attempt in all patients. This noninvasive technique of VF initiation may provide a useful clinical approach to ICD testing that eliminates the costs and risks of an invasive procedure.     

Initial Experience with a New Transvenous Defibrillation System

The clinical efficacy and safely of a new bidirectional transvenous defibrillation endocardial lead system (ELS) was studied in 39 patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT) or fibrillation (VF). There were 28 patients with coronary disease and 11 patients with nonischemic VT/VF. Fourteen patients received the ELS combined with antitachycardia pacing devices (Ventak PRx 1700, CPI) and 25 patients with the Ventak P or P2 (CPI). Implantation of the ELS was attempted in 47 patients. Intraoperatively, the mean defibrillation threshold (DFT) was > 25 joules in five patients and no reliable ELS position was found in three other patients. These eight patients underwent thoracotomy and epicardial leads implantation. The mean DFT was ≤ 20 jouJes in all 39 patients and the mean DFT was 18 joules. During the mean follow-up of 8 ± 2 months two patients (5%) died suddenly. Complications occurred in two patients (5%).     

Prospective Evaluation of Defibrillation Threshold and Postshock Rhythm in Young ICD Recipients

Background: Adaptation of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) systems to the needs of pediatric and congenital heart patients is problematic due to constraints of vascular and thoracic anatomy. An improved understanding of the defibrillation energy and postshock pacing requirements in such patients may help direct more tailored ICD therapy. We describe the first prospective evaluation of defibrillation threshold (DFT) and postshock rhythm in this population. Methods: We prospectively studied patients ≤60 kg at time of ICD intervention. DFTs were obtained using a binary search protocol with three VF inductions. Postshock pacing was programmed using a stepwise protocol, lowering the rate prior to each VF induction. Results: Twenty patients were enrolled: 11 had channelopathy, five congenital heart disease, and four cardiomyopathy. The median age was 16 years, median weight 48 kg. Twelve patients had a transvenous high‐voltage coil; eight had pericardial +/? subcutaneous coil(s). Median DFT was 7 J (range 3–31 J); 19/20 patients had DFT ≤15 J and all patients <25 kg had DFT ≤9 J (n = 6). There was no difference in DFT between patients with transvenous versus pericardial +/? subcutaneous coils (median 7 J vs 6 J, P = 0.59). No patient with normal atrioventricular conduction prior to defibrillation required postshock pacing (n = 16). There were no adverse events. Conclusions: These data suggest that many pediatric ICD patients have low DFTs and adequate postshock escape rhythm. This may help determine appropriate parameters for future design of pediatric‐specific ICDs. (PACE 2012;35:1487–1493)     

Permanent nonselective His bundle pacing in an adult with L‐transposition of the great arteries and complete AV block

We report the placement of a permanent transvenous nonselective His bundle pacing lead in conjunction with a transvenous pacemaker/implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator in an adult with Levo‐Transposition of the Great Arteries (L‐TGA) and a stenotic coronary sinus (CS) ostium, which would not accommodate a transvenous left ventricular (LV) pacing lead. Nonselective His bundle pacing provided a nearly identical ventricular activation pattern in this previously unpaced patient. Many L‐TGA patients will have an eventual need for permanent pacing and, given the challenges of CS cannulation, His bundle pacing may represent a preferred modality rather than pure morphologic LV pacing or surgical systemic ventricular lead placement to achieve optimal electrical synchrony.     

The Subcutaneous Array: A New Lead Adjunct for the Transvenous ICD to Lower Defibrillation Thresholds

Despite the benefits of transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), concern exists that patients with high defibriliation thresholds (DFTs) have an inadequate safety margin between the DFT and the maximum defibrillator energy. A new transvenous ICD lead adjunct, a subcutaneous lead array (SQ Array), was developed to increase safety margins by lowering DFTs. Composed of three lead elements joined in a common yoke, the SQ Array is tunneled subcutaneously in the left lateral chest. Serving as their own controls, 20 patients were studied intraoperatively comparing transvenous lead-alone DFTs with lead-SQ Array DFTs. Seventeen males and three females were randomized to receive the SQ Array through the CPI Ventak PBx/Endotak 70 series protocol. Mean patient age was 63.7 ± 2.5 years and mean ejection fraction 0.34 ± 0.04. DFTs were determined using a precise protocol of step-down/step-up testing commencing at 20 joules. Lead-alone DFTs were tested using the proximal coil as the anode (+). For the lead-SQ Array, the proximal coil and the array were linked as a common anode. The icad-SQ Array resulted in a statistically significant reduction in mean monophasic DFT from 23.3 ± 2.3 joules (lead-alone) to 13.5 ± 1.9 joules (lead-SQ Array) (P < 0.001). Six patients had lead-alone DFTs > 25 joules but did not require thoracotomy because of adequate DFT reduction with the SQ Array. We conclude that the SQ Array adjunct to the transvenous ICD lead lowers monophasic DFTs an average of 9.8 joules (40.6%) obviating the need for a thoracotomy in selected patients .     

Long-term follow-up of patients supplied with single-chamber or dual-chamber cardioverter defibrillators

INTRODUCTION: In patients who have an indication for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) a dual-chamber device is indicated in the case of concomitant significant sinus node disease or atrioventricular block. It is a matter of debate whether dual-chamber ICD may be beneficial for patients with preserved sinus and atrioventricular nodal function as data from prospective randomized trials are limited. Mid- or long-term follow-up data are unavailable. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred patients (age 60+/-12 years, 11 women) with the indication for the implantation of an ICD and without antibradycardia pacing indication were randomly assigned to either receive a dual-chamber ICD (n=52) or a single-chamber ICD (n=48). Patients were followed-up for a mean of 52+/-14 months. Mortality and arrhythmogenic morbidity were assessed. All-cause mortality was 21% for single-chamber and 31% for dual-chamber ICD recipients, respectively (P=0.26). Cardiovascular mortality was 13% for single-chamber ICD recipients versus 21% in the dual-chamber group (P=0.25). Subgroup analysis using 35% of ventricular paced beats as cutoff value in the dual-chamber ICD group revealed a 42% mortality rate for the patients with frequent ventricular pacing compared to 10% of patients with a low rate of ventricular pacing (P=0.05, relative risk 4.21, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-19.8). As for arrhythmogenic morbidity, the difference in the ventricular tachyarrhythmia load was not different in both groups (single chamber: 23+/-74 VT episodes, dual chamber: 54+/-134 VT episodes, P=0.17). CONCLUSION: In ICD recipients without conventional indication for dual-chamber pacing, dual chamber compared to single-chamber ICD has no advantage concerning mortality and arrhythmogenic morbidity in a long-term follow-up. In these patients the implantation of a single-chamber device is sufficient.     

Late Complications in Patients with Pectoral Defibrillator Implants with Transvenous Defibrillator Lead Systems: High Incidence of Insulation Breakdown

As the majority of ICDs with transvenous leads are now implanted in tbe pectoral region, complications associated with the technique are being identified. To determine the incidence of lead complications in patients with transvenous defibrillator leads and ICDs implanted in the pectoral region, 132 unselected consecutive patients with transvenous defibrillator leads had ICDs implanted in the pectoral region. Three lead systems were used:(1) lead system 1(45 patients) consisted of a transvenous pacing sensing lead and a superior vena cava coil with a submuscular patch used for defibrillation;(2) lead system 2(36 patients) utilized a CPI Endotak lead system: and(3) lead system 3(51 patients) utilized a Medtronic Transvene lead system. Patients were followed for 3–54 months(cumulative 2,269, mean 18 months). The average duration of follow-up with the three systems was 32, 12, and 11 months, respectively. At 30 months follow-up, all three lead systems had a low incidence of complications. However, there was a 13% overall incidence(45% actuarial incidence) of erosion of the insulation of the pacing sensing lead of system 1 at 50 months of follow-up. All lead complications were seen in patients with ICDs whose weights were > 195 g and volumes > 115 cc. The erosion was probably a consequence of the pressure by the large ICD against the lead in the pectoral pocket. Follow-up with lead systems 2 and 3 is relatively short(average 12 months) but no lead erosions were seen. Pectoral implantation of ICDs with long transvenous leads and large generators is associated with a moderate risk of late complications in the form of insulation breaks caused by pressure of the generator against the leads. The use of less redundant leads coupled with smaller ICDs will probably eliminate this complication.     

A Modified Transvenous Single Mechanical Dilatation Technique to Remove a Chronically Implanted Active‐Fixation Coronary Sinus Pacing Lead

We described a 77‐year‐old patient, previously implanted with a dual‐chamber pacemaker later upgraded to a cardiac resynchronization therapy‐defibrillator (CRT‐D) device with an active‐fixation coronary sinus pacing lead, who underwent a transvenous mechanical extraction procedure for a device‐related systemic infection. All leads were removed successfully with a transvenous approach. With regard to the coronary sinus (CS) lead (Attain 4195 StarFix, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA), manual traction was ineffective and extraction required long and challenging mechanical dilatation up to distal CS using either conventional sheaths or modified CS lead delivery. (PACE 2010; 34:e66–e69)