Do patients with an implantable defibrillator live longer?

OBJECTIVES: This study was done to provide information on the potential benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy regarding sudden and arrhythmia-related deaths and to examine whether such therapy improves survival. BACKGROUND: Implantation of automatic cardioverter-defibrillators is reported to abort sudden cardiac death due to malignant tachyarrhythmias. METHODS: Between 1989 and 1992, 107 patients were screened for implantation of a third-generation implantable cardioverter-defibrillator combined with endocardial leads. Mean age was 57 +/- 13 years and mean ejection fraction was 40 +/- 15%. Sudden death, total arrhythmia-related death and total cardiac death were compared with the occurrence of fast ventricular tachyarrhythmias (> 240 beats/min), assuming that most of these arrhythmias would have been fatal without treatment by the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. RESULTS: The surgical mortality rate was 2.7% in all 107 patients and 1% in the 99 patients who qualified for endocardial leads. During a follow-up period of 12 +/- 8 months, actuarial survival rate free of events at 6 months as well as at 12 and 18 months was 100% for sudden death, 97% for total arrhythmia-related death and 95% for total cardiac death. In contrast, after 6, 12 and 18 months, the rate of survival free of fast ventricular tachycardia was only 83%, 74% and 69%, respectively, and the rate of survival free of any ventricular tachyarrhythmia was only 59%, 49% and 40%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of patients treated with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and endocardial defibrillation leads is excellent. For many patients, this treatment is probably lifesaving.

Comparison of frequency of aggravation of ventricular tachyarrhythmias after implantation of automatic defibrillators using epicardial versus nonthoracotomy lead systems.

The time of onset of 4,471 episodes of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or fibrillation (VF) in 40 of 65 patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) with endocardial defibrillation electrodes (group 1) and in 53 of 123 with epicardial defibrillation electrodes (group 2) was analyzed to examine whether the incidence of VT/VF immediately after surgery is greater than during further follow up and whether the site of lead placement exerts an influence on the occurrence of these arrhythmias. Actuarial survival rates free of VT/VF were 77, 65, and 54% at 1, 3 and 6 months, respectively, for group 1, and 84, 66 and 52%, respectively, for group 2. The probability of VT/VF was increased only during the first week after surgery; in that week, 12.8% of all patients had VT/VF, without significant differences between groups 1 and 2. Until the end of the first month, this percentage increased to 23%, whereas only 12 to 15% of patients had VT/VF during subsequent months. In 19 patients with third-generation devices capable of terminating tachycardias by overdrive pacing, 326 of 412 VT/VF episodes occurring in the first week after surgery were terminated by antitachycardia pacing, and only 86 had to be terminated by cardioversion or defibrillation. No postoperative exacerbation of inappropriate ICD therapies was observed in any group; 2 to 5% of patients per month received ICD therapies for atrial fibrillation or sinus tachycardia. Patients who received appropriate ICD therapies in the first week after surgery were at high risk of recurrence of VT/VF.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Clinical experience with antitachycardia pacing and improved detection algorithms in a new implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of antitachycardia pacing modes and detection algorithms in patients with a new third-generation implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. METHODS: Twenty-three of 42 consecutive patients had coronary artery disease, 14 had dilated cardiomyopathy, 2 had prior valve replacement and 3 had arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia. The mean ejection fraction was 41 +/- 14%; there were 31 men (74%) and 11 women, with a mean age of 53 years. On the basis of preoperative and postoperative electrophysiologic studies, in 28 patients antitachycardia pacing was postoperatively programmed randomly as "burst" (66%) or autodecremental "ramp" (34%) stimulation with a first coupling interval of 81% of tachycardia cycle length and up to 8 sequences with 3 to 10 stimuli. RESULTS: During a follow-up interval of 6.3 +/- 2.2 months, 15 patients were treated by antitachycardia pacing for a median of 6 (range 1 to 59) hemodynamically stable ventricular tachycardias (175 +/- 12 beats/min). In 5 patients, 22 ventricular tachycardias (9%) were not terminated by antitachycardia pacing but by cardioversion. Seven (3%) of these episodes accelerated (> 50 ms) during antitachycardia pacing. Syncope did not occur during these episodes. In seven patients initial antitachycardia pacing in cases of supraventricular tachycardias delayed charging and redetection prevented inappropriate discharges. Additional detection algorithms were programmed only after inappropriate therapy. The sudden "onset" and "sustained rate duration" criteria were programmed in three patients and the cycle length "stability" criteria in six patients, respectively. After activation of these detection algorithms only two of the seven patients had further inappropriate device discharges. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, antitachycardia pacing by this implantable cardioverter-defibrillator effectively and appropriately terminated 91% of hemodynamically stable ventricular tachycardias. Inappropriate device discharges were prevented in some patients by antitachycardia pacing and additional detection algorithms.

Surgical experience with defibrillator implantation using nonthoracotomy leads.

Between October 10, 1989, and June 17, 1991, 109 patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias received an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator at our institution. In 50 patients, nonthoracotomy lead systems consisting of a subcutaneous chest wall patch electrode near the cardiac apex and one (Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc: Endotak C) or two (Medtronic: Transvene) transvenous electrodes were tested. The mean ejection fraction was 0.44 +/- 0.15 with a range from 0.19 to 0.81. Twenty-four patients had a history of open heart operation. In 43 patients the nonthoracotomy lead system was implanted, whereas in 7 patients epicardial patch lead systems were required due to elevated defibrillation thresholds during nonthoracotomy lead testing. There was one perioperative death unrelated to the operative procedure (hydrocephalus internus). Hemorrhage from the subcutaneous patch pocket or the device pocket that required reintervention occurred in 4 patients. During a mean follow-up of 13 +/- 5 months (range, 4 to 26 months) no dislocation of an endocardial lead, insulation defect, or lead fracture has been observed. In 1 patient, the lead system had to be removed due to infection of the subcutaneous patch pocket. The cardiovascular survival rate was 98% at 12 and 18 months, and freedom from sudden cardiac death was 100% at 6 and 12 months. In conclusion, defibrillator implantation using nonthoracotomy lead systems is feasible with a success rate of 86%, and during short-term follow-up no problems related to the lead system such as dislocation, fracture, or insulation defect have occurred.

Role of ventricular tachycardia surgery and catheter ablation as complements or alternatives to the implantable cardioverter defibrillator in the 1990s.

Although the implantable cardioverter defibrillator is used increasingly, other nonpharmacological approaches have their indications and merits. Furthermore, as the natural history of ventricular tachyarrhythmias or their underlying structural cardiac abnormality, i.e., coronary artery disease, dilated cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic right ventricular disease, etc. change, the mode of therapy may be modified accordingly. Because of the disappointing results of the CAST study in previously asymptomatic patients after myocardial infarction and the evidence that failure of one or two antiarrhythmic drugs tested by programmed ventricular stimulation in patients with documented sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation predicts further drug failure, there will be a significant increase in the use of implantable cardioverters defibrillators in the 1990s. However, care should be taken to avoid inappropriate use of these devices.

[Initial clinical experiences with a transvenous-subcutaneous defibrillation system]. / Erste klinische Erfahrungen mit einem transvenös-subkutanen Defibrillationssystem.

In 19 patients with an indication for an implantable defibrillator, it was tried to avoid thoracotomy by using two electrodes positioned via the subclavian vein in the right ventricle (for pacing, sensing, and defibrillation) and the superior vena cava or coronary sinus (for defibrillation), and one electrode positioned subcutaneously near the ventricular apex (for defibrillation). In 17 patients (89%) the transvenous-subcutaneous leads were implanted, whereas in the remaining two patients an epi-/pericardial lead system was subsequently used due to an insufficient defibrillation threshold. Perioperatively, no major complications were observed and patients were rapidly mobilized. Within a follow-up period of 7 +/- 4 months, no malfunction of the lead system became evident. Sixty-eight episodes of spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmias occurred, all of which were successfully terminated. In one patient an infection of the lead system developed after 2 months that proved refractory to antibiotics and required surgical removal. Thus, transvenous-subcutaneous placement of leads for implantable defibrillators yielded a sufficient defibrillation threshold in the majority of patients. Long-term efficacy was excellent and no malfunctions were observed. This approach seems to be feasible and advisable in patients with an increased risk for thoracotomy.