Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Septal Pacing: Long-Term Follow-Up of Ventricular Lead Performance

Background: The detrimental effects of right ventricular apical pacing on left ventricular function has driven interest in selective site pacing, predominantly on the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) septum. There is currently no information on long-term ventricular lead electrical performance from this site.
Methods: A total of 100 patients with ventricular lead placement on the RVOT septum undergoing pacemaker implantation for bradycardia indications were analyzed retrospectively. Lead positioning was confirmed with the use of fluoroscopy. Long-term (1 year) follow-up was obtained in 92 patients. Information on stimulation threshold, R-wave sensing, lead impedance, and lead complications were collected.
Results: Lead performance at the RVOT septal position was stable in the long term. Ventricular electrical parameters were acceptable with stable long-term stimulation thresholds, sensing, and impedance for all lead types. One-year results demonstrated mean stimulation threshold of 0.71 ± 0.25 V, mean R wave of 12.4 ± 6.05 mV, and mean impedance values of 520 ± 127 Ω. There were no cases of high pacing thresholds or inadequate sensing.
Conclusions: This study confirms satisfactory long-term performance with leads placed on the RVOT septum, comparable to traditional pacing sites. It is now time to undertake studies to examine the long-term hemodynamic effects of RVOT septal pacing.     

Right Ventricular Septal Pacing: The Success of Stylet-Driven Active-Fixation Leads

Background: The detrimental effects of right ventricular (RV) apical pacing on left ventricular function has driven interest in alternative pacing sites and in particular the mid RV septum and RV outflow tract (RVOT). RV septal lead positioning can be successfully achieved with a specifically shaped stylet and confirmed by the left anterior oblique (LAO) fluoroscopic projection. Such a projection is neither always used nor available during pacemaker implantation. The aim of this study was to evaluate how effective is the stylet-driven technique in septal lead placement guided only by posterior-anterior (PA) fluoroscopic view.
Methods: One hundred consecutive patients with an indication for single- or dual-chamber pacing were enrolled. RV septal lead positioning was attempted in the PA projection only and confirmed by the LAO projection at the end of the procedure.
Results: The RV lead position was septal in 90% of the patients. This included mid RV in 56 and RVOT in 34 patients. There were no significant differences in the mean stimulation threshold, R-wave sensing, and lead impedance between the two sites . In the RVOT, 97% (34/35) of leads were placed on the septum, whereas in the mid RV the value was 89% (56/63).
Conclusions: The study confirms that conventional active-fixation pacing leads can be successfully and safely deployed onto the RV septum using a purposely-shaped stylet guided only by the PA fluoroscopic projection. (PACE 2010; 49–53)     

Right ventricular outflow tract pacing: practical and beneficial. A 9-year experience of 460 consecutive implants

BACKGROUND: Pacing from the right ventricular apex (RVA) in patients with ventricular dysfunction has been identified as a possible contributor to deterioration of ventricular function. Therefore, alternative pacing sites such as the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) are receiving intensified scrutiny. An unresolved question is whether technical, procedural, and stability issues are comparable for the RVA and the RVOT. METHODS: This report details 460 consecutive ventricular pacing lead implants with the primary intended site in the RVOT. Patients were evaluated for success, complication rates, and followed-up for stability of pacing parameters. The total patient implant population included 300 male and 170 female patients with a mean age of 70.6 years. Ten patients were excluded from the analysis, since there was a primary indication and intention to implant in the RVA, leaving a total of 460 patients for analysis. The indications for pacing were symptomatic bradycardia due to any cause and/or Mobitz II or complete heart block. There was no clinical evidence of heart failure in 420 patients. In 40 patients with heart failure, the indication for pacing was cardiac resynchronization therapy using the RVOT as an alternate site when pacing from a branch vein of the coronary sinus was not possible. Outcome information was obtained from the implanter's clinic. RESULTS: The overall success rate in the RVOT was 84% over the total 9-year period with a 92% success rate in the last 4(1/2) years, using the RVOT technique described. At 20 months in a subgroup comparison of RVOT and RVA implants, there was no significant difference in pacing threshold, R-wave sensing, or pacing lead impedance. Dislodgment occurred in only 1 of 460 patients. Reasons for failure to implant in the RVOT include inability to find a stable position with adequate pacing and sensing thresholds (related to anatomy, scarred myocardium, pulmonary hypertension, tricuspid regurgitation), hemodynamic instability limiting time for implant, and a learning curve. Long-term stability and lead performance were excellent, and certain acute and chronic complications of RV pacing did not occur.     

A randomized prospective study of single coil versus dual coil defibrillation in patients with ventricular arrhythmias undergoing implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy

ICD implantation is standard therapy for malignant ventricular arrhythmias. The advantage of dual and single coil defibrillator leads in the successful conversion of arrhythmias is unclear. This study compared the effectiveness of dual versus single coil defibrillation leads. The study was a prospective, multicenter, randomized study comparing a dual with a single coil defibrillation system as part of an ICD using an active pectoral electrode. Seventy-six patients (64 men, 12 women; age 61 +/- 11 years) were implanted with a dual (group 1, n = 38) or single coil lead system (group 2,n = 38). The patients represented a typical ICD cohort: 60% presented with ischemic cardiomyopathy as their primary cardiac disease, the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.406 +/- 0.158. The primary tachyarrhythmia was monomorphic ventricular tachyarrhythmia in 52.6% patients and ventricular fibrillation in 38.4%. There was no significant difference in terms of P and R wave amplitudes, pacing thresholds, and lead impedance at implantation and follow-up in the two groups. There was similarly no difference in terms of defibrillation thresholds (DFT) at implantation. Patients in group 1 had an average DFT of 10.2 +/- 5.2 J compared to 10.3 +/- 4.1 J in Group 2, P = NS. This study demonstrates no significant advantage of a dual coil lead system over a single coil system in terms of lead values and defibrillation thresholds. This may have important bearing on the choice of lead systems when implanting ICDs.     

ICD Implantation in infants and small children: the extracardiac technique

BACKGROUND: There is no clear methodology for implantation of an internal cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in infants and small children. The aim of this study was to assess efficacy and safety of an extracardiac ICD implantation technique in pediatric patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An extracardiac ICD system was implanted in eight patients (age: 0.3-8 years; body weight: 4-29 kg). Under fluoroscopic guidance a defibrillator lead was tunneled subcutaneously starting from the anterior axillar line along the course of the 6th rib until almost reaching the vertebral column. After a partial inferior sternotomy, bipolar steroid-eluting sensing and pacing leads were sutured to the atrial wall (n = 2) and to the anterior wall of the right ventricle (n = 8). The ICD device was implanted as "active can" in the upper abdomen. Sensing, pacing, and defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) as well as impedances were verified intraoperatively and 3 months later, respectively. RESULTS: In seven of eight patients, intraoperative DFT between subcutaneous lead and device was <15 J. In the eighth patient ICD implantation was technically not feasible due to a DFT >20 J. During follow-up (mean 14.5 months) appropriate and effective ICD discharges were noted in two patients. DFT remained stable after 3 months in four of six patients retested. A revision was required in one patient due to lead migration and in another patient due to a lead break. CONCLUSIONS: In infants and small children, extracardiac ICD implantation was technically feasible. Experience and follow-up are still limited. The course of the DFT is unknown, facing further growth of the patients.     

The Effect of Dofetilide on Ventricular Defibrillation Thresholds

Introduction: High defibrillation threshold (DFT) with an inadequate defibrillation safety margin remains an infrequent but troubling problem associated with defibrillator implantation. Dofetilide is a selective class III antiarrhythmic drug that reduces DFTs in a canine model. We hypothesized that dofetilide would reduce DFTs in humans, obviating the need for complex lead systems.
Methods and Results: Sixteen consecutive patients with DFTs ≥20 J delivered energy at implant-received dofetilide therapy and underwent follow-up DFT testing acutely following drug loading and/or chronically (128 ± 94 days). Amiodarone was discontinued in four patients at implantation. With dofetilide, DFTs decreased from 28 ± 4 J to 19 ± 7 J (P < 0.0001), resulting in a safety margin of 15 ± 8 J for the implanted devices. Five patients subsequently had spontaneous arrhythmias terminated successfully with shocks.
Conclusion: Dofetilide reduces DFTs sufficiently to prevent the need for more complex lead systems. This strategy should be considered when an inadequate defibrillation safety margin is present.     

Thresholds and Complications with Right Ventricular Septal Pacing Compared to Apical Pacing

Background: Right ventricular septal pacing has been proposed as an alternative to apical pacing. However, data concerning thresholds and requirement for lead repositioning with this technique are scant.
Methods: We reviewed data at implantation and follow-up of 362 consecutive recipients of the same model of active fixation lead (Medtronic 5076-58, Minneapolis, MN, USA) to avoid differences due to lead characteristics. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether the lead was positioned on the interventricular septum (n = 157) or at the right ventricular apex (n = 205). Thresholds, lead impedance, and requirement for lead repositioning were compared between groups at implantation and follow-up.
Results: There were no differences between the septal and apical groups in sensing and pacing thresholds or lead impedance, either at implantation or during a 24-month follow-up. In the septal group, the lead had to be repositioned in four patients (2.5%) due to lead dislodgement in two patients, acute threshold rise in one patient, and pericardial effusion in another patient (the lead had unintentionally been positioned on the anterior free wall in these last two patients). In the apical group, the lead had to be repositioned in eight patients (3.9%, P = 0.56) due to lead dislodgement in three patients and acute threshold rise in five patients.
Conclusions: Acute and chronic thresholds associated with septal pacing are similar to those observed with apical pacing, and risk of lead dislodgement is low. However, multiple radioscopic views must be used to avoid inadvertent positioning of the lead on the anterior free wall .     

Five-Year Follow-Up of a Bipolar Steroid-Eluting Ventricular Pacing Lead

Steroid-eluting pacing leads are known to attenuate the threshold peaking early after implantation. Long-term performance, however, is not yet settled. The lead design tested in this prospective study combines a 5.8-mm2 tip of microporous platinum-iridium with elution of 1.0 mg of dexamethasone sodium phosphate and tines for passive fixation (model 5024, Medtronic Inc.). In 50 patients (mean age 69 +/- 10 years), the electrode was implanted in the right ventricular apex. Follow-up was performed on days 0, 2, 5, 10, 28, 90, 180 and every 6 months thereafter for 5-years postimplant. At each visit, pacing thresholds were determined as pulse duration (ms) at 1.0 V and as the minimum charge (microC) delivered for capture. Lead impedance (omega) was telemetered at 2.5 V-0.50 ms, and sensing thresholds (mV) were measured in triplicate using the automatic sensing threshold algorithm of the pacemaker implanted (model 294-03, Intermedics Inc.). On the day of implantation, mean values were 0.10 +/- 0.03 ms, 0.12 +/- 0.03 microC, 758 +/- 131 omega, and 13.1 +/- 1.8 mV, respectively. Beyond 1-year postimplant, pacing thresholds did not vary significantly. Sensing thresholds and lead impedance values were stable during long-term follow-up. Five years after implantation, mean values were 0.23 +/- 0.11 ms, 0.24 +/- 0.07 microC, 670 +/- 139 omega, and 11.6 +/- 3.1 mV for pulse width and charge threshold, lead impedance, and sensing threshold, respectively, and all leads captured at 1.0 V with the longest pulse duration available (1.50 ms). It is concluded that the bipolar steroid-eluting tined ventricular lead showed stable stimulation thresholds, lead impedance values, and sensing thresholds for 5 years after implantation.     

Long-Term Stability of Defibrillation Thresholds with Intrapericardial Defibrillator Patches

From March 1982 to May 1, 1992, 105 consecutive patients underwent initial implant of cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) at our institution. Twenty-nine patients (23 male and 6 female, average ejection fraction 32.24%) with ICD systems implanted via thoracotomy and either intra- or extrapericardial patches, had one or more revisions including 56 generator changes or staged implant procedures, three patch revisions, one patch lead fracture without revision, and one sensing lead revision. The time between pulse generator revisions averaged 19.5 months. Initial defibrillation threshold mean was 12.8 joules (n = 25); at first revision, 14.46 joules (n = 29), (P = NS); by fifth revision, 15.0 joules (n = 2), (P = NS). One patch was noted to be crinkled at 70 months; one patch had migrated by 39 months, and two patch leads had fractured at the costal margin by 69 and 90 months. One patient with marginal defibrillation thresholds had an additional patch placed at revision to an upgraded ICD unit. Once acceptable defibrillation threshold (DFT) is obtained, the long-term intrapericardial DFT remains stable unless a specific problem occurs. As a small, nonstatistically significant increase in DFT may occur, caution must be exercised in patients with marginal DFTs.     

1-year performance of a defibrillation lead with a small electrode surface for high impedance pacing: a randomized,controlled study

A small electrode surface reduces pacing current drain and can extend generator longevity. The study evaluated the performance of a tined, quadripolar defibrillation lead (model 6944) that has a small-surfaced, steroid-eluting electrode tip for high impedance pacing. In a prospective, controlled study, 34 patients with conventional ICD indications were randomized one to one to receive the high impedance model 6944 or a tined defibrillation lead with a conventional sized, steroid-eluting electrode tip model 6942. Lead performance was evaluated at implant, prior to hospital discharge, and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months thereafter. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between patients implanted with lead model 6942 (n = 16) or model 6944 (n = 17). One patient randomized to receive the model 6942 was excluded from the study and was implanted with an active-fixation lead after stable lead positioning was neither possible with the 6942 nor with the 6944 electrode. No other lead related adverse events were observed. At implant, there were no significant differences between pacing thresholds, sensing performance, defibrillation impedances, and defibrillation thresholds in both groups, but pacing impedance of the model 6944 (988.6 +/- 217.7 omega) was approximately twice as high as high as in the model 6942 (431.7 +/- 83.7 omega; P < 0.0001). This difference remained highly significant throughout the observation period of 12 months, while R wave amplitudes and pacing thresholds remained equal in both lead models. The use of a tined defibrillation lead with a small, steroid-eluting electrode tip appears safe and results in a high pacing impedance without compromising system performance.     

Defibrillation Thresholds and Perioperative Mortality Associated with Endocardial and Epicardial Defihrillation Lead Systems

Defibrillation thresholds (DFT) and perioperative mortality were evaluated in 123 patients who had endocardial defibrillation leads implanted in conjunction with the Medtronic model 7216A/7217 (Medtronic, Inc.) cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Clinical variables, implant DFTs, and 30-day perioperative mortality were compared with 266 patients who had the ICD implanted with epicardial defibrillation leads. The two groups were comparable in age, gender, and incidence of coronary artery disease. New York Heart Association Class I and II were more frequent in patients with endocardial leads (87.7%) as compared to those with epicardial leads (78.8%; P < 0.001). Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly higher in patients with the endocardial lead system (37% vs 33%; P < 0.05). A significant proportion of patients with epicardial lead systems underwent another cardiac surgical procedure at the time of ICD implantation (13.9%) as compared to none in those who had endocardial leads implanted (P < 0.001). All patients with endocardial leads had implantation of triple lead systems as compared to 53.4% with epicardial leads (P < 0.001). The mean DFT at implant was lower in epicardial lead recipients (8.9 J) as compared to endocardial lead recipients (13.3 J; P < 0.001). Perioperative mortality had a significant trend to lower risk for endocardial lead systems (0.8%) as compared to epicardial systems (4.2%; P = 0.07). We conclude that this endocardial lead system has additional electrode and higher defibrillation energy requirements than the epicardial lead systems used with the Medtronic pacemaker ICD. However, the use of endocardial nonthoracotomy defibrillation leads is associated with a markedly reduced perioperative risk of ICD implantation. This could be due to patient characteristics, a less invasive implant procedure, and absence of concomitant cardiac surgery.     

Right Ventricular Septal Pacing: A Comparative Study of Outflow Tract and Mid Ventricular Sites

Background: Prolonged right ventricle (RV) apical pacing is associated with left ventricle (LV) dysfunction due to dysynchronous ventricular activation and contraction. Alternative RV pacing sites with a narrower QRS compared to RV pacing might reflect a more physiological and synchronous LV activation. The purpose of this study was to compare the QRS morphology, duration, and suitability of RV outflow tract (RVOT) septal and mid‐RV septal pacing. Methods: Seventeen consecutive patients with indication for dual‐chamber pacing were enrolled in the study. Two standard 58‐cm active fixation leads were passed to the RV and positioned in the RVOT septum and mid‐RV septum using a commercially available septal stylet (model 4140, St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA). QRS duration, morphology, and pacing parameters were compared at the two sites. The RV lead with less‐satisfactory electrical parameters was withdrawn and deployed in the right atrium. Results: Successful positioning of the pacing leads at the RVOT septum and mid‐RV septum was achieved in 15 patients (88.2%). There were no significant differences in the mean stimulation threshold, R‐wave sensing, and lead impedance between the two sites. The QRS duration in the RVOT septum was 151 ± 14 ms and in the mid‐RV septum 145 ± 13 ms (P = 0.150). Conclusions: This prospective observational study shows that septal pacing can be reliably achieved both in the RVOT and mid‐RV with active fixation leads using a specifically shaped stylet. There are no preferences in regard to acute lead performance or paced QRS duration with either position. (PACE 2010; 33:1169–1173)     

Serial Changes in Right Ventricular Apical Pacing Lead Impedance Predict Changes in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Functional Class in Heart Failure Patients

Pacing impedance has been proposed to monitor the clinical status of patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). This study examined whether changes in right ventricular (RV) pacing impedance correlate with changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class during long-term follow-up in pacemaker recipients with CHF. The study included 67 patients, 70 ± 12 years of age, in NYHA class II or III, and with a mean LVEF = 29 ± 8% at implant. LVEF, NYHA class, and bipolar pacing impedance at the RV outflow tract (RVOT) and apex (RVA) were measured at implant and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of follow-up. At implant, impedance was similar in RVOT (548 ± 115 Ω) and RVA (571 ± 174 Ω). Between implant and 3 months, mean impedance decreased (P < 0.0001) at both the RVOT (472 ± 62 Ω) and RVA (488 ± 86 Ω), LVEF increased (43 ± 14%, P < 0.0001), and the NYHA class decreased from 2.4 ± 0.5 to 2.1 ± 0.6 (P = 0.0001). Changes in RVA impedance correlated with changes in LVEF (r = 0.45, P = 0.002). A 50 Ω decrease in RVA impedance corresponded to a 3% decrease in LVEF. RVA impedance decreased significantly as NYHA class increased from I to IV (P = 0.04). There was no correlation between impedance measured at the RVOT and LVEF or NYHA class. A decrease in bipolar pacing impedance at the RVA was associated with worsening LVEF and the NYHA class. The use of pacing impedance to monitor the clinical status in CHF is dependent on the RV pacing site.     

Right pectoral implantable cardioverter defibrillators: role of the proximal (SVC) coil

Introduction: Increased defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) with right active pectoral implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and/or right proximal coils (SVC) are attributed to poorer vector. However, SVC affects impedance, current flow, and shock waveform phase duration (PD), which exert independent DFT effects.
Objective: Compare DFTs and shock characteristics in SVC On with SVC Off in right ICDs.
Methods and Results : DFT+ testing (n = 42, 62% males, 62 ±15 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 26 ± 11%, ischemic cardiomyopathy 65%, amiodarone 26%) revealed >20% incidence of high DFT (>20J) . Dilated cardiomyopathy and amiodarone increased DFT. Individual impedance variability (25–74 Ω) generated a wide PD range (2.6–8.7 ms). Overall, SVC On reduced impedance by 33% (from 54 ± 10 to 35 ± 5Ω, P< 0.0001), and shortened PD (from 5.45 ± 1.20 to 3.67 ± 0.74 ms, P< 0.01). SVC On affected DFTs in 19/42 (45%) patients. SVC On was beneficial in 12/19. PD shortened but current flow remained unaltered. (In these, SVC Off impedance was >45Ω and PD >5 ms.) SVC On was detrimental in 7/19 despite increasing current flow. In these, PD shortened excessively (median 2.9 ms) because impedance was low (31 ± 4Ω). In 3/6 cases with DFTs >20 J in both SVC On and Off , PD optimization reduced DFT. Overall, selection of best SVC configuration or deliberate PD programming yielded DFTs ≤20 J in >90% patients, reducing need for system modification to <7%.
Conclusions : Right pectoral active ICDs have high DFTs. The SVC coil may be detrimental when pulse waveform excessively shortens. Noninvasive maneuvers, for example, SVC and waveform optimization, may improve DFT.     

Short-and Long-Term Performance of a Tripolar Down-Sized Single Lead for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Treatment: A Randomized Prospective European Multicenter Study

A new, thinner (10 Fr) and more flexible, single-pass transvenous endocardial ICD lead, Endotak DSP, was compared with a conventional lead, Endotak C, as a control in a prospective randomized multicenter study in combination with a nonactive can ICD. A total of 123 patients were enrolled, 55 of whom received a down-sized DSP lead. Lead-alone configuration was successfully implanted in 95% of the DSP patients vs 88% in the control group. The mean defibrillation threshold (DFT) was determined by means of a step-down protocol, and was identical in the two groups, 10.5 ± 4.8 J in the DSP group versus 10.5 ± 4.8 J in the control group. At implantation, the DSP mean pacing threshold was lower, 0.51 ± 0.18 V versus 0.62 ± 0.35 V (p < 0.05) in the control group, and the mean pacing impedance higher, 594 ± 110 Ω vs 523 ± 135 Ω (p < 0.05). During the follow-up period, the statistically significant difference in thresholds disappeared, while the difference in impedance remained. Tachyarrhythmia treatment by shock or antitachycardia pacing (ATP) was delivered in 53% and 41%, respectively, of the patients with a 100% success rate. In the DSP group, all 28 episodes of polymorphic ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation were converted by the first shock as compared to 57 of 69 episodes (83%) in the control group (p < 0.05). Monomorphic ventricular tachycardias were terminated by ATP alone in 96% versus 94%. Lead related problems were minor and observed in 5% and 7%, respectively. In summary, both leads were safe and efficacious in the detection and treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. There were no differences between the DSP and control groups regarding short- or long-term lead related complications.     

Intrathoracic and Ventricular Impedances are Associated with Changes in Ventricular Volume in Patients Receiving Defibrillators for CRT

Background: Some implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are able to monitor intrathoracic impedance to detect pulmonary fluid overload. This is achieved by measuring impedance between the ICD case and the right ventricular (RV) lead. We hypothesized that the measured impedance would rise with improvement in left ventricular (LV) volumes during cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), and that such impedance changes would be more apparent when measured with an alternative pacing vector.
Methods: We analyzed echocardiographic and impedance data from heart failure patients implanted with a CRT–ICD capable of intrathoracic impedance measurement for fluid accumulation diagnosis, and LV pacing impedance recording for lead integrity monitoring.
Results: In 127 out of 170 patients that received de novo CRT implantation, the LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) decreased at 6-month follow-up (LVESV at 6 month—LVESV at baseline <0: group A). For the remaining 43 patients (group B) the change was ≥0. Despite comparable values at baseline (P = 0.262), the impedances of groups A and B gradually diverged soon after the implant, resulting in significant difference between the two groups at the 6-month visit (P = 0.001). The changes in LV dimensions produced larger differences between groups in the impedance measured between the LV and the RV leads (P < 0.001). The regression analysis demonstrated an inverse correlation between paired changes of volume and intrathoracic impedance. Higher correlation coefficient was obtained using the LV-to-RV measurement vector (r =−0.635, P < 0.001).
Conclusions: The changes in ICD-measured impedance seem associated with the LV volume changes induced by CRT. Specifically, the LV-to-RV impedance estimations seem to better correlate with paired changes of ventricular volumes. (PACE 2010; 64–73)     

Human experience with transvenous biventricular defibrillation using an electrode in a left ventricular vein

This study investigated the safety and feasibility of transvenous biventricular defibrillation in ICD patients. Some patients may have high DFTs due to weak shock field intensity on the LV. Animal studies showed a LV shocking electrode dramatically lowered DFTs. This approach might benefit heart failure patients already receiving a LV lead or conventional ICD patients with high DFTs. A modified guidewire was used as a temporary left venous access defibrillation electrode (LVA lead). In 24 patients receiving an ICD, the LVA lead was advanced through a guide catheter in the coronary sinus (CS) and into a randomized LV vein (anterior or posterior) using a venogram for guidance. Paired DFT testing compared a standard right ventricular defibrillation system to a biventricular defibrillation system. There were no complications or adverse events. As randomized, LVA lead insertion success was 87% and 71% for anterior and posterior veins, respectively, and 100% after crossover. Total insertion process time included venogram time (32.5 +/- 26.9 minutes, range 5-115, mode 15 minutes) and LVA lead insertion time (15 +/- 14 minutes, range 1-51, mode 7 minutes). An apical LVA lead position was achieved in 11 (45%) of 24 patients and 7 (64 %) of these 11 displayed a DFT reduction; however, mean DFTs were not statistically different. Transvenous biventricular defibrillation is feasible and was safe under the conditions tested. Additional clinical studies are justified to determine if optimized LV lead designs, lead placement, and shock configurations can yield the same large DFT reductions as observed in animals.     

Evaluation of fractal-coated temporary pacing leads in the early postoperative course

Background: The performance of temporary pacing wires is still limited by capture and sensing problems. Fractal coating can enhance electrical properties and reliability. We therefore investigated fractal-laminated wires in comparison with conventional wires.
Methods: In 21 patients two unipolar, fractal-coated pacing wires (fe) and one conventional bipolar electrode (se) were implanted in ventricular position. Afterward pacing threshold (V), R-wave sensing (mV), lead impedance (ohm), and slew-rate (mV/s) were measured. Loss of capture or sensing and dislocation was documented. fe wires were examined with energy dispersive x-ray diffraction (EDX)-analysis and scanning electrode microscopy (SEM).
Results: Failure in pacing was less frequent in fe wires. Also fe leads had lower pacing thresholds at implantation (0.76 ± 0.15 V vs 1.51 ± 0.95 V, P< 0.0001) and afterward. Furthermore fe wires showed lower increase of pacing threshold/time (0.25 V/day vs 0.42 V/day). R-wave sensing and slew-rate values in the fe group on day of operation (5.81 ± 4.80 mV; 0.63 ± 0.71 V/s) were lower than in the se group (10.37 ± 6.89 mV; 1.85 ± 1.71 V/s P< 0.0001) and afterward. Nevertheless, decrease of amplitude/time was lower in fe wires (0.17mV/day vs 0.46 mV/day). fe wires always had lower impedance values.
Conclusions: Lower pacing threshold and increase of threshold/time in fe wires indicate more reliable function. Initial lower sensitivity values are still not understandable and must be investigated. However, fe wires, constancy of sensing and impedance values was more stable, so fe epicardial wires can be recommended for safe and feasible use.     

Right ventricular outflow tract placement of defibrillation leads: five year experience

Over a 5-year period, 112 patients (89 male/23 female, mean age 65 years) underwent right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) placement of permanent active-fixation transvenous pacing/defibrillating leads. At implantation, the pacing threshold was 0.6 +/- 0.3 V at 0.5 ms pulse duration and R wave amplitude was 10.9 +/- 4.9 mV. The defibrillation threshold (DFT) of right-sided implants was 17.7 +/- 3.4 J while that of left-sided implants was 16.1 +/- 3.3 J. Patients were followed at 1 and 3 month postimplant and at six-month intervals thereafter. At mean follow-up of 22.5 +/- 17.5 months (range 1-47 months) there were no lead dislodgments, unsuccessful shock therapies, or failure to sense or pace for bradycardia or tachycardia. Death was not sudden in the 17 patients who died. We conclude that RVOT pacing-defibrillation lead implantation is safe, efficacious, and potentially attractive because preliminary evidence suggests that it may not be associated with the adverse hemodynamic effects of pacing at the right ventricular apex.     

Present understanding of shock polarity for internal defibrillation: the obvious and non-obvious clinical implications

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty about the best electrode configuration has combined with the programming flexibility in modern implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) to result in routine polarity reversal during an implant to deal with a high defibrillation threshold (DFT). We feel that this practice is not always supported by the clinical data and the present scientific understanding of defibrillation. METHOD: A meta-analysis of the clinical studies on ICD shock polarity was performed. Subgroup analyses were also performed to test the impact of high DFTs, various tilts, and the use of the hot can electrode. A review of the basic research surrounding the effects of polarity in defibrillation is also presented. RESULTS: A total of 224 patients were studied. The use of an anodal right ventricular (RV) coil lowers the mean DFT by 14.8% (P = 0.00001). It provides thresholds equal to or lower than cathodal defibrillation in 83% of patients. The fraction of patients with lower anodal DFTs was 94/224 versus 38/224 for cathodal polarity. This phenomenon may be explained by virtual electrode effects. In particular, anodal electrodes tend to produce collapsing wavefronts while cathodal electrodes tend to produce expanding proarrhythmic wavefronts. CONCLUSION: In an ICD implant, the RV coil should be the anode. Furthermore, DFT testing beginning with cathodal defibrillation is most likely unnecessary and needlessly extends the procedure's duration and increases the risks for the patient.