The Value of Electrophysiology Study and Prophylactic Implantation of Cardioverter Defibrillator in Patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

Fifty-three consecutive patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and no history of sudden death underwent electrophysiology (EP) study. Sustained polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) was induced in 19 patients (35%). Patients with prior syncope or near syncope had a higher incidence of VT/VF inducibility. An implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) was placed in 14 of the 19 patients. Of the remaining 5 patients with inducible VT/VF, three refused ICD implantation, while two underwent septal myectomy and VT/VF was no longer inducible afier the operation. None of the patients received antiarrhythmic drugs. During a mean follow-up period of 47 ± 31 (2–117) months, no events occurred in the 34 patients with negative EP study. Three events occurred among the 19 patients with inducible VT/VF. One patient died suddenly, one developed wide complex tachycardia which required resuscitation, and one patient received an appropriate ICD shock. In conclusion, sustained polymorphic VT/VF was inducible in about one-third of patients with HCM. Noninducibility of VT/VF appeared to predict a favorable prognosis. Although the overall event rate was low in patients with inducible VT/VF, prophylactic ICD implantation in patients with multiple risk factors may be appropriate.     

Are Electrophysiological Studies Needed Prior to Defibrillator Implantation?

At present, patients with documented sustained VT or resuscitated cardiac arrest (CA) are treated with ICDs. The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate if a routine electrophysiological study should be recommended prior to ICD implantation. In 462 patients referred for ICD implantation because of supposedly documented VT (n = 223) or CA (n = 239), electrophysiological study was routinely performed. In 48% of the patients with CA, sustained VT or VF was inducible. Electrophysiological study suggested conduction abnormalities (n = 11) or supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (n = 3) in conjunction with severely impaired left ventricular function to have been the most likely cause of CA in 14 (5.9%) of 239 patients. Likewise, sustained VT was only inducible in 48% of patients with supposedly documented VT. Of these inducible VTs, nine were diagnosed as right ventricular outflow tract tachycardia or as bundle branch reentry tachycardia. Supraventricular tachyarrhythmias judged to represent the clinical event were the only inducible arrhythmia in 35 (16%) patients (AV nodal reentrant tachycardia [n = 7], AV reentry tachycardia [n = 4], atrial flutter [n = 19], and atrial tachycardia [n = 5]). Based on findings from the electrophysiological study, ICD implantation was withheld in 14 (5.9%) of 239 patients with CA and in 44 (19.7%) of 223 patients with supposedly documented VT. During electrophysiological study, VT or VF was only reproducible in about 50% of patients with supposedly documented VT or CA. Electrophysiological study revealed other, potentially curable causes for CA or supposedly documented VT in 12.6% (58/462) of all patients, indicating that ICD implantation can potentially be avoided or at least postponed in some of these patients. Based on these retrospective data, routine electrophysiological study prior to ICD implantation seems to be advisable.     

Ventricular Arrhythmia Inducibility Predicts Subsequent ICD Activation in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy Patients: A DEFINITE Substudy

Objectives: We evaluated whether electrophysiologic (EP) inducibility predicts the subsequent occurrence of spontaneous ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) in the Defibrillators in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy Treatment Evaluation (DEFINITE) trial.
Background: Inducibility of ventricular arrhythmias has been widely used as a risk marker to select implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) candidates, but is believed not to be predictive in nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients.
Methods: In DEFINITE, patients randomized to the ICD arm, but not the conventional arm, underwent noninvasive EP testing via the ICD shortly after ICD implantation using up to three extrastimuli at three cycle lengths plus burst pacing. Inducibility was defined as monomorphic or polymorphic VT or VF lasting 15 seconds. Patients were followed for a median of 29 ± 14 months (interquartile range = 2–41). An independent committee, blinded to inducibility status, characterized the rhythm triggering ICD shocks.
Results: Inducibility, found in 29 of 204 patients (VT in 13, VF in 16), was associated with diabetes (41.4% vs 20.6%, P = 0.014) and a slightly higher ejection fraction (23.2 ± 5.9 vs 20.5 ± 5.7, P = 0.021). In follow-up, 34.5% of the inducible group (10 of 29) experienced ICD therapy for VT or VF or arrhythmic death versus 12.0% (21 of 175) noninducible patients (hazard ratio = 2.60, P = 0.014).
Conclusions: In DEFINITE patients, inducibility of either VT or VF was associated with an increased likelihood of subsequent ICD therapy for VT or VF, and should be one factor considered in risk stratifying nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients.     

Characteristics and relevance of clustering ventricular arrhythmias in defibrillator recipients

INTRODUCTION: Studies of recurrent ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) have been limited to "electrical storms," where recurrent arrhythmias necessitate repeated external cardioversions or defibrillations. Patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) may also suffer frequently recurrent arrhythmias. The aim of this study was to analyze the temporal pattern and the clinical relevance of clustering ventricular arrhythmias in ICD recipients. METHODS: The incidence and the type of arrhythmias were determined by reviewing stored electrograms. VT/VF clusters were defined as the occurrence of three or more adequate and successful ICD interventions within 2 weeks. Two hundred and fourteen consecutive ICD recipients were followed during an average of 3.3 +/- 2.2 years (698 patient-years). RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (24%) suffered 98 VT/VF clusters 21 +/- 22 months after ICD implantation, 93% of these clusters consisting of recurrent regular VT. Monomorphic VT as index event leading to ICD implantation was the only factor predicting VT/VF clusters. Kaplan-Meier estimates of the combined end-point of death or heart transplantation showed a 5-year event-free survival of 67% versus 87% in patients with and without clusters, respectively (P = 0.026). Adjusted hazard ratios for death or heart transplantation in the group with arrhythmia clusters was 3.5 (95% confidence interval 1.5-7.9 P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: VT/VF clusters are frequent late after ICD implantation particularly in patients who had VT as index-event. As arrhythmias and recurrent ICD interventions are responsible for an important morbidity, there is a possible role for a prophylactic intervention. Furthermore, VT/VF clusters are an independent marker of increased risk of death or need for heart transplantation.     

Primary Prevention Implantation of Cardioverter Defibrillator without Defibrillation Threshold Testing: 2-Year Follow-up

Background: Even though the intraoperative threshold testing of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator ( ICD ) may cause hemodynamic impairment or be unfeasible, it is still considered required standard practice at the time of implantation. We compared the outcome of ICD recipients who underwent defibrillation threshold testing (DFT) with that of patients in whom no testing was performed.
Methods: A total of 291 subjects with ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy received transvenous ICDs between January 2000 and December 2004 in five Italian cardiology centers. In two centers, DFT was routinely performed in 137 patients (81% men; mean age 69 ± 9 years; mean ejection fraction 26 ± 4%) (DFT group), while three centers never performed DFT in 154 patients (90% men; mean age 69 ± 9 years; mean ejection fraction 27 ± 5%) (no-DFT group).
Results: We compared total mortality, total cardiovascular mortality, sudden cardiac death (SCD), and spontaneous episodes of ventricular arrhythmia (sustained ventricular tachycardia, VT, and ventricular fibrillation, VF) between these groups 2 years after implantation (median 23 months, 25th–75th percentile, 12–44 months). On comparing the DFT and no-DFT groups, we found an overall mortality rate of 20% versus 16%, cardiovascular mortality of 13% versus 10%, SCD of 3% versus 0.6%, VT incidence of 8% versus 10%, and VF incidence of 6% versus 4% (no significant difference in any comparison).
Conclusions: No significant differences in the incidence of clinical outcomes considered emerged between no-DFT and DFT groups. These results should be confirmed in larger prospective studies.     

Failure of transvenous ICD to terminate ventricular fibrillation in a patient with left ventricular noncompaction and polycystic kidneys

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) testing in patients with left ventricular noncompaction (LVNC) at the time of implantation and potential difficulties with ventricular fibrillation (VF) induction/termination in LVNC patients are often not stated in the literature. This report describes the failure of transvenous implantation of an ICD in a 40-year-old patient with LVNC and polycystic kidneys. A high defibrillation threshold (DFT) prevented termination of ICD-induced VF. This case suggests that DFT testing should be considered in any LVNC patient during ICD implantation. The association of LVNC and polycystic kidneys is also discussed.     

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Events in Patients with Asymptomatic Nonsustained Ventricular Tachycardia:

Primary prevention trials have demonstrated that patients with coronary disease, reduced left ventricular function, and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) have improved survival with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy, presumably secondary to effective termination of life-threatening arrhythmias. However, stored intracardiac electrograms were not always available and specific arrhythmias leading to ICD therapy were not always known. We examined the occurrence of ICD events in 51 consecutive patients who match the described patient profile to determine the frequency of appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapy. ICD detections were noted in 18 (35%) patients during a median follow-up period of 13.1 months. Appropriate therapy for sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) occurred in 11 (22%) patients, with appropriate shocks in 8 (16%) patients and appropriate antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in 4 (8%) patients. The time to first appropriate therapy occurred at a mean of 17 +/- 12 months (median 18 months, range 3-36 months). Inappropriate therapy occurred in 5 (10%) patients with inappropriate shocks in 4 patients and inappropriate ATP in 2 patients. Inappropriate therapy was delivered for supraventricular arrhythmias (SVAs) in 4 patients and for T wave oversensing in 1 patient. The reason for shock therapy was unknown in 1 patient (2%) due to ICD malfunction. The mean arrhythmia rate leading to appropriate therapy for VT/VF was 232 +/- 72 beats/min (range 181-400 beats/min), and the mean rate leading to inappropriate therapy for SVT was 168 +/- 10 beats/min (range 160-180 beats/min). Patients with coronary disease and asymptomatic NSVT commonly receive appropriate defibrillator therapy. These results support the need for ICD implantation for primary prevention, with attention to careful programming of the detection rate to prevent inappropriate therapy.     

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.     

Time to First Shock in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) Patients with Chagas Cardiomyopathy

The time to first ICD shock has been extensively studied in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). However, there are no published data on ICD shocks in patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (ChC). The occurrence of the first appropriate ICD shock during the first 6 months of follow-up in 20 patients with ChC (group 1) and 35 CAD patients (group 2) was analyzed retrospectively. All patients had received a third-generation pectoral ICD for ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation (VT/VF). Indications for ICD implantation were refractoriness to drug therapy or noninducibility of VT/VF at EPS in cardiac arrest survivors. Results: The mean age, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and sex in groups I and II were 57.4 ± 7 years versus 64 ± 9 (P < 0.01), 30.9%± 10% versus 32.9%± 10% (P = NS), and 10 men versus 31 women (P < 0.005), respectively. Six months after ICD implantation, 85% (17/20) group I patients received appropriate ICD shocks versus 51 % (18/35) in group 2, a statistically significant difference (P < 0.02, RR: 1.65, OR: 5.35). Conclusions: The incidence of appropriate ICD shocks within the first 6 months postimplantation was significantly higher in ChC patients than in CAD patients. ChC patients were younger and more often women than CAD patients.     

Interactions Between Transvenous Nonthoracotomy Cardioverter Defibrillator Systems and Permanent Transvenous Endocardial Pacemakers

Limited information is available regardIng potential adverse Interactions between transvenous nonthoracotomy cardioverter defibrillators and pacemakers. We describe our experience with 37 patients who have undergone successful Implantation of both a transvenous defibrillator and pacemaker. The patients’mean age was 64 ± 12,9 years. Thirty-three were male and four were female. The mean LVEF wos 30.8%±11.8%, The indications for pacemaker implantation included sick sinus syndrome in 13 patients, complete heart block in 15 patients, sinus brady-cardia secondary to medications In 8 patients, and neurocardlogenlc syncope In 1 patient. The Indications for Insertion of a defibrillator Included medically refractory VT in 27 patients and sudden cardiac death in 10 patients. Twenty-three patients received an Endotak lead and 14 patients received o Transvene lead. Eighteen patients had a pacemaker prior to an ICD, 14 patients had an ICD prior to a pacemaker, and 4 patients had both devices placed simultaneously. Interaction was evaluated at Implant of the second device and 1–3 days after both devices were placed. Detection of VF/VT was analyzed during asynchronous pacing (DOO/VOO) with maximum pacing output. In addition, in six patients, DFT was determined before and after pacemaker implantation. In 14 patients (38%), device interactions that could not always be optimally corrected were observed. In five patients, the pacemaker was reset to the “noise reversion” mode after high energy ICD discharge, Oversensing of atrial pacemaker stimuli resulted in inappropriate ICD firings in four patients. This wos observed only with a specific device ond could not be prevented by atriol leod repositioning in two of them, but required reprogramming of the pacemaker to the VVImode. An increase in DFT was observed in five patients who had a pacemaker implanted after on ICD. Compared with previously published studies, a greater frequency of tronsvenous ICD and pacemaker Interactions were observed. Considering that almost 50% of the patients already have o pacemaker ot the time of ICD Implant, the ovalloblllty of deflbrlllotors with dual chamber pocing capability will not eliminate the potential for this problem.     

Inappropriate ICD therapy due to proarrhythmic ICD shocks and hyperpolarization

A 50-year-old man with an ischemic cardiomyopathy underwent ICD implantation for inducible ventricular fibrillation (VF). Sixteen months later he experienced inappropriate ICD therapy due to atrial fibrillation with a rapid ventricular response. The initial shock resulted in the initiation of VF (proarrhythmia) and the patient received an additional shock converting his rhythm to an idioventricular rhythm with a cycle length of 490 ms (122 beats/min). Due to lead hyperpolarization, the device oversensed ventricular events and the patient subsequently received additional shocks.     

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.     

Evaluation of Patients with Bundle Branch Block and "Unexplained" Syncope: A Study Based on Comprehensive Electrophysiologic Testing and Ajmaline Stress

Thirty-five patients with bundle branch block (BBB) and unexplained syncope underwent electrophysiologic study (EPS) including programmed ventricular stimulation and ajmaline administration (1 mg/kg, IV) to induce infra-His block. A prolonged HV interval (greater than 55 ms) was present in 16 of the 35 patients. Ajmaline-induced HV block occurred in 12 patients (complete HV block in 10, and 2:1 HV block in two). Monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) was inducible in nine (25.7%) and polymorphic VT in two patients (5.7%). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was less than 40% in five patients (45.5%) with inducible VT. Two patients had an unexpected co-existence of inducible HV block and VT. The remaining 14 patients (40%) had no detectable abnormality. The incidence of inducible VT was higher (45% vs 13.3%), and the presence of negative studies was lower (30% vs 53.3%) in patients with structural heart disease (n = 20), when compared to those with no significant heart disease (n = 15) (differences not significant [NS]). During a mean follow-up period of 16.5 +/- 9.2 months, all the patients with inducible HV block have been asymptomatic after having received permanent pacemakers. Patients with inducible monomorphic VT (except one with poor left ventricular function who died suddenly) have also been asymptomatic on antiarrhythmic drugs. Of the remaining patients, seven with normal EPS, two with prolonged HV intervals but no inducible HV block (despite being given permanent pacemakers) and one patient with polymorphic VT on antiarrhythmic drugs continue to have recurrent syncope. Approximately 60% of patients with BBB and unexplained syncope have clinically significant electrophysiologic abnormalities.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Impact of Dual Chamber Pacing on the Incidence of Atrial and Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias in Recipients of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Recent observations suggest that frequent dual-chamber pacing in recipients of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) may adversely influence clinical outcomes. This prospective, multicenter study examined the relationship between the frequency of atrial (%AP) and ventricular pacing (%VP) and the incidence of atrial (AT) and/or ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT) in a standard ICD population. A total of 141 consecutive patients with primary and secondary ICD indications were studied. Continuous arrhythmia detection with a dual-chamber ICD revealed paroxysmal AT in 60 (43%) and VT in 72 (51%) patients within 6 months of device implantation. Far-field oversensing of ventricular signals occurred in 13% of all "atrial tachy response" mode switches. Without adjustment for covariates, a higher %AP was associated with an increased incidence of AT (P < 0.05). However, this association remained only weakly significant after adjustment for covariates using a multivariate model. High New York heart failure functional classes correlated significantly with AT (P = 0.02) and VT (P = 0.007). Rate-modulated pacing, programmed in 1/3 of patients, correlated with occurrence of AT (P = 0.006), but not with occurrence of VT. With respect to dual-chamber pacing, a %AP ≥ 48% combined with a %VP > 40% was associated with an increased probability for VT. In conclusion, AT and VT occurred frequently within 6 months after dual-chamber ICD implantation. High rates of DDD/R stimulation were associated with a trend toward higher incidence of AT, VT, or both.     

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in Patients with Chagas' Disease: Are They Different from Patients with Coronary Disease?

Chagas' disease is a parasitic affliction, endemic to certain regions of South America, which may lead to a chronic dilated nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Ten Chagasic patients were compared to 18 coronary patients undergoing transvenous ICD implantation for ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), or aborted cardiac arrest. Indications for ICD implantation were either drug intolerance or refractoriness, or no inducible tachyarrhythmia at EPS. There were no statistically significant differences between the Chagas and coronary artery disease groups with respect to age (60.2 vs 62.6 yrs], NYHA Class II (50% vs 62%), ejection fraction (31.1% vs 29.7%), and incidence of cardiac arrest (20% vs 33%), respectively. The following ICD implant and long-term follow-up variables were compared between the two groups: pacing threshold (0.94 V vs 0.95V), defibrillation threshold (19.5 J vs 19.6 J), number of VT episodes (414 vs 435), number of spontaneous VT terminations (86 vs 187), percent efficacy of antitachycardia pacing (93.9% vs 92.1 %), and total number of shocks (112 vs 145). These differences were not statistically significant. We conclude that patients with Chagas' disease, compared with coronary artery disease patients, have similar clinical characteristics leading to ICD implantation. Furthermore, no differences were found with respect to ICD and long-term follow-up characteristics between the two groups.     

Late Gadolinium Enhancement in Patients with Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy

One‐third of all patients with heart failure have nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDM). Five‐year mortality from NIDM is as high as 20% with sudden cardiac death (SCD) as the cause in 30% of the deaths. Currently, the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is used as the main criteria to risk stratify patients requiring an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to prevent SCD. However, LVEF does not necessarily reflect myocardial propensity for electrical instability leading to ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). Due to the differential risk in various subgroups of patients for arrhythmic death, it is important to identify appropriate patients for ICD implantation so that we can optimize healthcare resources and avoid the complications of ICDs in individuals who are unlikely to benefit. We performed a systematic search and review of clinical trials of NIDM and the use of ICDs and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) for risk stratification. LGE identifies patients with NIDM who are at high risk for SCD and enables optimized patient selection for ICD placement, while the absence of LGE may reduce the need for ICD implantation in patients with NIDM who are at low risk for future VF/VT or SCD.     

Results of Delivered Therapy for VT or VF in Patients with Third-Generation Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Third-generation implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) offer tiered therapy and can provide significant advantage in the management of patients with life-threatening arrhythmias. Three different types of ICDs were implanted in 21 patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). Arrhythmia presentation was VT(76%), VF(10%), or both (14%). The mean left ventricular ejection fraction for the group was 32.4 ± 7%. No surgical mortality occurred. Prior to discharge individual EPS determined the final programmed settings of the ICDs. During a mean follow-up of 13 ± 1.4 months (range 2–20) the overall patient survival was 85.7%. No sudden arrhythmic or cardiac death occurred. Twenty of 21 patients (95%) received therapy by their device. In 14 patients (67%) antitachycardia pacing (A TP) was programmed "on," 13 of which was self-adaptative autodecremental mode. There were 247 VT episodes, 231 of which were subjected to ATP with 97% success and 3% acceleration or failure. Low energy shocks reverted all other VT episodes. VF episodes were successfully reverted by a single shock (93%), two shocks (6%), or three shocks (1 %). We conclude that ATP therapy of VT is successful in the large majority of episodes with rare failures, and that VF episodes are generally terminated by a single ICD shock.     

Chronic experiences with a single lead dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator system

Monitoring of atrial rhythm in patients implanted with ICDs may improve accuracy in identifying supraventricular arrhythmias and, therefore, prevent inappropriate therapies. Since difficulties were found in dual chamber ICDs with separate leads, a new designed single lead dual chamber ICD system was tested. Twenty-five patients implanted with a Deikos A+ (single coil defibrillation lead with two atrial sensing rings combined with a dual chamber ICD with a high amplifying atrial channel) were tested. Atrial and ventricular signals were analyzed during sinus rhythm (SR) and sinus tachycardias (STs), atrial flutter and AF, and VT or VF. Follow-ups were performed after 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after implantation. Analysis of EGM amplitudes of stored episodes revealed that atrial signals during atrial flutter (2.1 +/- 0.51 mV) were comparable to those of ST (2.2 +/- 0.5 mV). Atrial amplitudes during AF were significantly lower (0.81 +/- 0.5 mV, P<0.01). During VF atrial "sinus" signals (2 +/- 0.8 mV) were stable. Ventricular parameters did not differ from a standard ICD lead; defibrillation threshold was 11.4 +/- 4.5 J (16 patients). During intraoperative and prehospital discharge measurements, 97.1% of SR-P waves and 99.2% of atrial flutter waves were detected correctly. In AF 91.11% of atrial signals were detected. Analysis of 505 stored episodes showed that 96.8% of ST and 100% of atrial flutter and 100% of AF episodes have been classified correctly and no underdetection of VT/VF was found. The first experiences with the new VDD-ICD system show an increase of the specificity to detect ventricular tachycardias to a level comparable to dual chamber ICDs with two leads. The reliability of this system has to be proven in a prospective randomized study.     

Safe performance of magnetic resonance imaging on a patient with an ICD

This is a report on a patient with an implanted cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) who intentionally underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of a malignant brain tumor. To avoid inadequate detection of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF), the ICD was inactivated by programming the VT-detection and VT/VF-therapy status off. The patient came through the protocol safely and without any difficulty or discomfort. There was no arrhythmic event. MRI affected neither programmed data nor the function of the ICD system.     

Defibrillation Energy Requirements with Single Endocardial (Endotak™) Lead

The need for thoracotomy in usually high risk patients has limited the use of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Initial clinical results with endocardial and subcutanous patch electrodes (SQPs) are en couraging. Using a single endocardial lead in the absence of a SQP for chronic implantation of the cardioverter defibrillator, the goal of the study was to obtain defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) of 15 Joules (J) or less and to investigate changes in DFT over time. We tested 19 consecutive patients (15 men, 4 women] age 62 ± 8.5 years with malignant ventricular arrhythmias (14 VT/5 VF). The underlying heart disease was coronary artery disease in 15 pafients, dilative cardiomyopathy in two patients, and primary electricaJ disease in two patients. Four patients had undergone previous cardiac surgery. Left ventricular ejection fraction ranged between 14% and 66% (39%± 12.6%). Pacing thresholds (0.54 ± 0.17 Vat 0.5 msec), R wave amplitude for pacemaker sensing (14.2 ± 7.0 mV), slew rate (2.12 ± 1.4 V/sec), and resistance (500.3 ± 73.9 W) were sufficient in all patients. Eighteen patients met our endocardial impiant criteria with a DFT ≤ 15 J (10.05 ± 4.03 J) using monophasic (14 patients) or biphasic (four patients) pulse wave forms. In the one remaining patient, with a DFT of 20 J, we implanted a SQP but there was no reduction of the DFT. All patients tested showed successful defibrillation prior to discharge. During follow-up of 88 patient-months (1–9 months), 114 spontaneous VT/VF episodes occurred in five patients and were all successfully terminated. Eleven patients with a minimum follow-up of 2 months were reassessed. In seven out of 11 patients, termination of VF was achieved with the same minimal energy requirements obtained intraoperatively. In three patients, DFT increased by 5 J (one patient) and 10 J (two patients). In a further patient, X ray revealed dislocation of the endocardial lead. Our data suggest that effective defibrillation is feasible with a single endocardial lead for implantation of cardioverter defibrillator. In addition, we strongly recommend repetitive x-ray control to detect asymptomatic lead dislocation. Despite stable DFTs in most of our patients, an energy difference of ≤ 15 J between acute DFT and cardioverter defibrillator energy rating seems to be currently desirable to ensure successful postoperative defibrillation.