Exploding Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

A 79-year-old man with a pectoral implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) system underwent periodic defibrillation threshold testing 18 months after implant. Attempted delivery of a 15-J shock caused a light flash above the pocket and a loud "pop." High-voltage lead impedance was <20 ohms. Pocket exploration revealed insulation abrasion of the high-voltage portion of the single-coil right ventricular lead. The outer shield of the active can pulse was perforated and scorched due to arcing. Device analysis confirmed a shorted transistor in the high-voltage output circuit. Unsuspected physical contact between high-voltage electrodes of opposite polarity within the pocket can cause catastrophic ICD system failure.     

Clinical Experience with a Dual-Chamber Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator to Treat Atrial Tachyarrhythmias

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a new dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to detect and treat atrial tachyarrhythmias in patients with drug-refractory atrial fibrillation (AF) and no indication for a ventricular ICD. METHODS AND RESULTS: A dual-chamber ICD (Medtronic 7250 Jewel AF) was implanted in 144 of 146 patients. The device discriminates atrial tachycardia from AF based on cycle length and regularity, and uses atrial overdrive pacing as well as shocks to terminate tachyarrhythmia episodes. Patients were followed for an average of 12.6+/-6.2 months. Use of antiarrhythmic drugs was 63% at baseline and did not change over time. Kaplan-Meier estimates of 12-month complication-free survival, device therapy survival, and patient survival were 85%, 91%, and 98%, respectively. Positive predictive accuracy of spontaneous atrial tachyarrhythmia detection was 99%, while atrial overdrive pacing and shocks terminated 40% and 87% of treated episodes, respectively. Median duration of successfully treated episodes was 8.9 minutes versus 144 minutes for the therapy failures. There was no reduction in the use of patient-activated shock therapy over time; at the 12-month follow-up evaluation, 94% of patients were in sinus rhythm. Ventricular tachyarrhythmias (67 episodes) were detected and appropriately treated in 7.6% of patients. CONCLUSION: This dual-chamber ICD appears to be safe and well tolerated in patients with drug-refractory symptomatic atrial tachyarrhythmias. The device, used in combination with drugs, effectively treats atrial tachyarrhythmias with pacing and/or shock therapies and decreases the median episode duration. In addition, the device protects from ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with AF and structural heart disease.     

Delivery of Noncommitted Shocks for Nonsustained Ventricular Arrhythmias by a New Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator with Abortive Shock Capability

Shock Delivery Despite Abortive Shock Capability. Introduction: To describe the delivery of noncommitted implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks despite self-termination of ventricular arrhythmias. Abortive shock capability should eliminate the delivery of shocks for self-terminating ventricular arrhythmias. The delivery of noncommitted shocks despite abortive shock capability is, therefore, unexpected and previously unreported.
Methods and Results: Among 118 patients who received the Transvene nonthoracotomy lead system and the Jewel ICD (model 7219D), three patients (1.7%) experienced spurious, noncommitted shocks for self-terminating arrhythmias. Only one detection zone (i.e., ventricular fibrillation) had been programmed in the defibrillator in each patient. In all three patients, the ventricular arrhythmias self-terminated during the charging period. One patient received seven shocks during periods of asystole, and the other two patients received one shock each. Two different mechanisms for shock delivery in this setting were identified: one occurring in the absence of electrical activity at the end of the bradycardia escape interval (i.e., associated with bradyarrhytbmias), and the other when two sensed electrical events (i.e., escape beats) occurred during the so-called "synchronization" window of the defibrillator.
Conclusions: In rare patients with the Jewel defibrillator, shocks may be delivered for self-terminating arrhythmias despite abortive shock capability. Patients who are dependent upon pacing from their implanted defibrillator are at particular risk for shock in the aftermath of self-terminating ventricular arrhythmias. Defibrillator programming strategies aimed at eliminating or diminishing the incidence of this problem are discussed.     

Reproducibility of Ventricular Fibrillation Characteristics in Patients Undergoing Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantation

Reproducibility of VF Characteristics. Introduction: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the immediate reproducibility of local electrogram characteristics recorded during repeated episodes of induced ventricular fibrillation (VF) in patients undergoing implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation.
Methods and Results: Power spectral analysis (using a fast Fourier transform algorithm) of electrograms recorded during 3 seconds of VF were analyzed in 24 patients undergoing ICD implantation using a Medtronic Transvene lead. Patients had 2 to 7 episodes of VF that were induced during defibrillation threshold testing. VF was induced by burst pacing (n = 20) or T wave shock (n = 4). Simultaneous electrograms during VF were recorded from a Medtronic Transvene lead with the following configurations: (1) a narrow spaced (12 mm) dedicated bipole used clinically for sensing; (2) a unipolar electrogram from the right ventricular coil; and (3) a widely spaced (18.3 mm) integrated bipole using the distal tip and the coil. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were determined to examine the reproducibility of these VF characteristics among VF episodes in each patient. Recordings from both bipolar configurations had ICCs from 0.40 to 0.55, whereas unipolar recordings ICCs were below 0.40. Reproducibility was similar for dedicated and integrated recordings.
Conclusions: Frequency characteristics of repeated episodes of VF induced in the same subjects show fair-to-good but not excellent reproducibility. Bipolar recordings were far more reproducible than unipolar recordings, but both bipolar configurations had similar reproducibility. These findings have implications for both the pathophysiology of induced VF and the design of VF detection algorithms.     

Predictive Value of QT Dispersion for Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

Background: QT dispersion, measured as interlead variability of QT intervals in the surface electrocardiogram, has been demonstrated to provide an indirect measurement of the inhomogeneity of myocardial repolarization as a potential substrate for ventricular arrhythmias. Methods: QT dispersion was measured in the standard 12-lead ECG in 51 patients at the time of implantation of a third generation implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) with automatic electrogram storage capability for electrical events triggering device therapy. In addition, QT dispersion was measured in 100 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. All 5 1 study patients with ICD were prospectively followed to determine possible associations between QT dispersion at implant and subsequent spontaneous ICD shocks for ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT). Results: Rate-corrected QT dispersion and adjusted QTc dispersion, which takes account of the number of leads measured, were significantly greater in ICD patients compared to controls (76 ± 25 ms vs 46 ± 11 ms, and 24 ± 7 ms vs 14 ± 3 ms respectively, P < 0.0 1). During 15 ± 8 months follow-up, ventricular tachyarrhythmias occurred in 23 (45%) of 51 ICD patients. QTc dispersion and adjusted QTc dispersion were not significantly different between ICD patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias and ICD patients without ventricular tachyarrhythmias during follow-up (74 ± 19 ms versus 77 ± 29 ms, and 23 ± 6 ms vs 25 ± 8 ms respectively). Conclusion: Increased QT dispersion measured in the 12-lead standard ECG does not appear to be a useful marker for future arrhythmic events in a mixed patient population with ICD.     

右室流出道放置心室除颤电极导线的研究现状

植入型心律转复除颤器的右室除颤电极导线通常放置于右室心尖部,但近来研究显示长期右室心尖部起搏会导致心脏收缩和舒张功能下降,另外,当右室心尖部起搏阈值和/或除颤阈值较高时,需改变除颤电极导线的放置位置,以达到最佳的治疗效果。相对于右室心尖部而言,右室流出道放置除颤电极导线有一定的优势。现对右室流出道放置除颤电极导线的相关问题做一简要的综述。     

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy for Life-Threatening Arrhythmias in Young Patients

Objectives: This study examined the indications, efficacy and outcomes of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) use in the pediatric population. Background: ICDs are first-line therapy for adults resuscitated from sudden cardiac death (SCD) or at high risk for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Use of ICDs in children and young adults is infrequent and there are few data regarding this group. Methods: We abstracted and analyzed data for all patients in whom ICDs were implanted. Results: A total of 38 devices were implanted in 27 patients. Age ranged from 6 to 26 years (mean, 14) and weight ranged from 16 to 124 kg (mean, 47). Diagnoses included long QT syndrome (9), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy [6], repaired congenital heart disease [5];, and idiopathic ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation [4]. Indications comprised resuscitated SCD [15], syncope [9], and life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia [3]. Initial device placement was infraclavicular in 13, abdominal in 13 and intrathoracic in 1. Epicardial leads were used with 5 systems. A single coil lead was used in 17. Seven patients, all previously resuscitated from SCD, experienced 88 appropriate successful discharges. There were 6 inappropriate discharges in 3 patients. Mean time to device replacement was 3.1 years (n = 11). Complications included 2 infected systems, 2 lead dislodgments, 2 lead fractures, 1 post-pericardiotomy syndrome, 1 adverse event with defibrillation threshold (DFT); testing, and 1 patient with psychiatric sequelae. No deaths occurred with implanted ICDs. Conclusions: These data demonstrate that ICDs provide safe and effective therapy in young patients. The indications for ICDs as primary preventive therapy remain uncertain.     

Cost‐Effectiveness of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy

ICD Cost‐Effectiveness. Cost‐efficacy assessment of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy has proved contentious and may have limited uptake of ICD therapy, particularly in Europe. Published modeling assessments are too inaccurate to determine clinical practice, and assessments based on clinical studies are incomplete (from the cost‐efficacy viewpoint). Although ICD therapy seems certain to be most cost‐effective in patients who are likely to have good longevity if their risk of sudden cardiac death is countered, the benefit of ICD therapy is not necessarily limited to such groups. Physicians and health economists need to develop a better understanding of how to assess high‐technology therapy costs so that uptake of such therapy is appropriately expedited with due regard to ethical and cost constraints.     

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Utilization Among Device Recipients Presenting Exclusively with Syncope or Near-Syncope

ICD Use in Syncope. Introduction : Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are occasionally used in presumed high-risk patients with electrocardiographically undocumented syncope, although the incidence of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in this population is not well defined.
Methods and Results : We studied 33 consecutive patients receiving; an ICD (67% nonthoracotomy and 70% tiered therapy) after electrophysiologic testing for unmonitored "syncope" (n = 29) or "near-syncope" (n = 4). Atherosclerotic heart disease was present in 24 (73%); mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 0.39 ± 0.15; and sustained monomorphic ventricular tacycardia (SMVT) was inducible in 18 (55%). Over a median follow-up of 17 months (range 4 to 61), 12 patients (36%) received ≥ 1 appropriate ICD discharge triggered by SMVT (cycle length 230 lo 375 msec) in 10 and ventricular Mutter or fibrillation in 2—without concomitant antiarrhythmic medication in 8 of 12 cases, Inducible SMVT and LAEF ≤ 0.35 were statistically significant, independent predictors of an appropriate ICD discharge (P < 0.02 and P < 0.03, respectively). Estimated 1-year cumulative survival free of appropriate discharge was 34% versus 87%, respectively, in patients with versus without inducible SMVT (P < 0.02), and 18% versus 56%, respectively, in patients with LVEF ≤ 0.35 versus LVEF > 0.35 (P < 0.03).
Conclusion : In this highly select, multicenter population of ICD recipients with electrocardiographically undocumented syncope, a substantial incidence of appropriate device discharges was observed, particularly in patients with inducible SMVT and LVEF ≤ 0.35. These findings support the notion that, in patients with LV dysfunction and inducible SMVT, ventricular tachyarrhythmias are likely to account for episodes of syncope or near-syncope.     

埋藏式心脏转复除颤器安置的临床经验

总结非开胸经锁骨下静脉穿刺安置埋藏式心脏转复除颤器 (ICD)的手术方法、除颤阈值 (DFT)测定及ICD工作参数设置等临床经验。 10例患者 ,6例有反复晕厥病史。 2例晕厥时心电图证实为心室颤动 (简称室颤 ) ,体外电除颤成功 ,另 8例心内电生理均诱发出持续性室性心动过速或室颤。其中冠心病 8例 (1例合并Brugada综合征 ) ,扩张性心肌病 1例 ,原发性室颤 1例。 5例术前口服胺碘酮治疗。结果 :全部经锁骨下静脉置入ICD ,术中所有患者成功诱发室颤 ,并一次电击成功。手术时间 92± 2 7min。DFT≤ 2 0J,电击阻抗 4 1.2± 15 .3Ω ,R波高度 16 .3± 6 .6mV ,无手术并发症。结论 :经锁骨下静脉置入ICD方法简单 ,安全可靠 ;术前口服适量胺碘酮对术中诱发室颤无影响。     

Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Dysplasia: Clinical Results with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia is a clinical entitycharacterized by fatty infiltration of the right ventricle and left bundlemorphology ventricular tachycardia occurring in young patients. The mostcommon cause of death is tachyarrhythmic. Pharmacological andnonpharmacological therapies, including implantable cardioverterdefibrillators, have been used to treat the arrhythmias. However, rightventricular endocardial leads in this population may be associated with anincreased risk of perforation and suboptimal sensing and defibrillationefficacy due to the diseased right ventricle. We report on 12 patients witharrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia who were treated with implantablecardioverter defibrillators. The mean age was 31± 9 years (range15-48). Patients presented with presyncope (5), syncope (4), or cardiacarrest (3). All patients had electrocardiographic abnormalitiescharacteristic of the condition.Follow-up averaged 22 ± 13months (range 1-45). There was one sudden death at 1 month of follow-up. Ofthe 12 patients, 8 have had appropriate therapy delivered by the implantabledefibrillator. Six patients are currently on sotalol to reduce the frequencyof implantable defibrillator discharges. In conclusion, implantablecardioverter defibrillators with nonthoracotomy leads are feasible and safein patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia. The frequencyof appropriate therapy is high, supporting the use of implantablecardioverter defibrillators in this population.During programmedelectrical stimulation nine patients had sustained ventricular tachycardia,while three patients had no inducible arrhythmia. Transvenous leads wereplaced in nine patients. In these patients pacing thresholds weresignificantly higher, R-wave amplitudes were significantly lower, anddefibrillation thresholds were not significantly different than in a cohortof patients without right ventricular dysplasia. There were no acute orchronic complications of right ventricular lead placement.     

Sudden Death in Recipients of Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Systems:

INTRODUCTION: Transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) systems are very effective in preventing sudden death; however, little is known about terminal events and potential causes and mechanisms of sudden death in recipients of these devices. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 74 cases of sudden death among patients enrolled in several clinical investigations of transvenous ICD systems. Eighty-one percent were men (mean age 68+/-10 years), 86% had coronary artery disease, mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.27+/-0.11, and two thirds presented with sustained ventricular tachycardia. The final event was witnessed in 65 patients (81%). Based on reported ICD shocks, documented rhythm, and/or postmortem device data, sudden death was deemed tachyarrhythmic in 49 cases (66%), nontachyarrhythmic in 12 (16%), and indeterminate in the remaining 13 (18%). Multivariate analysis of several clinical and nonclinical factors found advanced age (> 65 years, P = 0.03, odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.05 to 2.92), reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (< 0.35, P < 0.01, OR 3.51, CI 1.66 to 7.40), and having antibradycardia pacing ICDs (P = 0.02, OR 5.26, CI 1.37 to 20.0) to be independent predictors of sudden death. One or more predisposing factors and/or potential causes of sudden death were identified in 21 patients (28%). CONCLUSION: In this select group of transvenous ICD recipients, (1) sudden death was associated with ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in at least two thirds of cases, (2) nearly one third of patients had one or more factors, some device related, that could have been associated with sudden death, and (3) death ensued despite appropriate ICD therapies and, in many cases, external resuscitation, suggesting acute adverse events as common terminal factors.     

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Oversensing During Periods of Rate-Related Bundle Branch Block

ICD Oversensing During Rate-Related BBB. A patient with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and a dual chamber pacemaker experienced inappropriate ICD therapies only during periods of rate-dependent right bundle branch block. Analysis of both stored and real-time ICD electrograms was critical to correctly diagnosing the problem and offering a solution.     

Runaway Pacemaker in an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

Runaway Pacemaker in an ICD. Introduction : Runaway pacemaker is a potentially catastrophic complication of any permanent pacing system.
Methods and Results : A 70-year-old man was found to have erratic behavior of his implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) during a routine outpatient interrogation. His device was turned off, and he was hospitalized in preparation for a pulse generator replacement. During his hospitalization, his ICD unexpectedly began pacing rapidly. Despite prompt resuscitation attempts, the patient died. Postmortem examination of the device demonstrated a crystal oscillator failure.
Conclusion : A previously unrecognized component malfunction is a potentially lethal complication of ICDs.     

Geographic Differences in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Usage

Geographic Differences in ICD Usage. Despite the demonstrated efficacy of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in reducing sudden and total mortality in selected patients, their implantation rates vary greatly among countries. In the United States, the implantation rate is 185 implants per million inhabitants compared with only 31 implants per million in western Europe. The differences in ICD use may be explained by the following factors: manner in which sudden cardiac death is perceived by politicians and physicians (sudden cardiac death is perceived as a “nice way of dying”); differences in indications; physicians' information; prevalence of coronary artery disease; sudden cardiac death survival rates; perceived reliability of alternative treatment (namely, antiarrhythmics including amiodarone); economic backgrounds; and health care politics. Furthermore, the cost of this treatment strategy must be considered. This issue has been raised because generalization of ICD use in patients matching clinical characteristics of patients enrolled in the primary prevention trials may represent a significant economic burden to be added to the already overloaded health care system. This low acceptance may not be entirely related to budget constraint but also to the perceived efficacy of ICDs by physicians and health authorities.     

Ventricular tachycardia in the era of ventricular assist devices

Sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with advanced cardiomyopathy is a potentially life-threatening arrhythmia. Newer treatment strategies have evolved that combine the use of catheter ablation to target the substrate for VT and ventricular assist devices (VADs) to hemodynamically support the failing ventricle. This editorial is targeted to the practicing clinician caring for these difficult patients. The current article reviews the use of percutaneous VADs to support catheter ablation of VT, the use of durable VADs to support the failing heart in patients with recurrent VT, ventricular arrhythmias in patients with durable VADs, and the use of catheter ablation to treat VT in patients with durable VADs.     

Myopotential Sensing by a Dual Chamber Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator:

Myopotential Oversensing by a Dual Chamber ICD. Introduction : Inappropriate discharges and/or improper inhibition of bradycardia pacing due to oversensing of extraneous signals in implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have been described. With one exception, no previous report involving an intact lead system bas cited myopotential oversensing as the cause.
Methods and Results : Two case reports of myopotential oversensing by a dual chamber ICD system are reported. In the first patient suffering from chronic pulmonary obstructive disease, intermittent myopotential seasing during labored respiration resulted in episodic inhibition of bradycardia pacing. In the second patient, oversensing of sustained myopotentials generated during strenuous isometric activity resulted in an inappropriate ICD discharge. For both, the ICD system consisted of a CPI model 1810 Ventak AV used in conjunction with a model 0125 Endotak lead, incorporating integrated bipolar sensing.
Conclusion : Although modern ICDs have proven to be highly effective in detecting and terminating malignant tachyarrhythmias, the opportunity for improving their detection specificity remains.     

Sensing and Tachyarrhythmia Detection Problems in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

ICD Sensing-Detection Errors. Sensing of cardiac activity and detection of tachyarrhythmias in implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are complex functions and errors occur. Sources of sensing-detection errors include the variable nature of intracardiac electrograms, the occasional inability of automatically adjusting signal amplifiers to cope with this variability, problems with sensing leads, inappropriate programming, and limitations of tachyarrhythmia detection algorithms, which are optimized to avoid underdetection of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Current ICDs vary considerably in details of sensing and detection function, programmability, and diagnostic data, so that a thorough knowledge of each device is necessary to diagnose and correct these problems. Stored intracardiac electrograms and/or marker channels available in most of these devices have contributed much to our understanding of sensing-detection errors. Undersensing of individual signals, most frequently due to signal variability and/or inability of the amplifier to adjust adequately, can lead to delay or failure of tachyarrhythmia detection. Delay or failure of tachyarrhythmia detection can also occur if algorithms to enhance specificity, such as sudden onset or rate stability, are utilized. Oversensing of T waves or noise can lead to false detection; however, the most common cause of false detection is the inability of current detection algorithms to distinguish supraventricular from ventricular tachyarrhythmias. New algorithms that incorporate atrial sensing, electrogram morphology analysis, or hemodynamic monitoring may result in improved detection accuracy of ICDs in the future.