Multicenter experiences with a single lead electrode for dual chamber ICD systems.

Monitoring of atrial signals improves the accuracy in identifying supraventricular tachyarrhythmias to prevent inappropriate therapies in patients with implantable ICDs. Since difficulties due to the additional atrial lead were found in dual chamber ICD systems with two leads, the authors designed a single pass VDD lead for use with dual chamber ICDs. After a successful animal study, the prototype VDD lead (single coil defibrillation lead with two additional fractally coated rings for bipolar sensing in the atrium) was temporarily used in 30 patients during a German multicenter study. Atrial and ventricular signals were recorded during sinus rhythm (SR), atrial flutter, AF, and VT or VF. The implantation of the lead was successful in 27 of 30 patients. Mean atrial pacing threshold was 2.5 +/- 0.9 V/0.5 ms, mean atrial impedance was 213 +/- 31 ohms. Atrial amplitudes were greater during SR (2.7 +/- 1.6 mV) than during atrial flutter (1.46 +/- 0.3 mV, P < 0.05) or AF (0.93 +/- 0.37 mV, P < 0.01). During VF atrial "sinus" signals had significantly (P < 0.01) lower amplitudes (1.4 +/- 0.52 mV) than during SR. The mean ventricular sensing was 13.3 +/- 7.9 mV and mean ventricular impedance was 577 +/- 64 ohms. Defibrillation was successful with a 20-J shock in all patients. In addition, 99.6% of P waves could be detected in SR and 84.4% of flutter waves during atrial flutter. During AF, 56.6% of atrial signals could be detected without modification of the signal amplifier. In conclusion, a new designed VDD dual chamber lead provides stable detection of atrial and ventricular signals during SR and atrial flutter. Reliable detection of atrial signals is possible without modification of the ICD amplifier.

New-generation lithotripters for treatment of patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator: experimental approach and review of literature.

PURPOSE: The influence of shockwaves applied during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy on the function of implantable cardioverter defibrillators was evaluated. Mechanical influences as well as proper electrical function were tested in an experimental approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two implantable defibrillators (Ventak Mini 1743 and AVII 1821) were exposed to the shockwaves of a new-generation lithotripter. Each of the antidysrhythmic devices was tested at several distances from and within the focus of the lithotripter. All studies were performed with maximum energy and the number of shockwaves used for stone treatment. The devices were connected to an ECG simulator, and continuous recording of a surface ECG, a shock ECG, and marker channel was performed. RESULTS: No macroscopic and microscopic mechanical damage was observed. The detection function of the implantable defibrillators was not altered by any electromagnetic artifacts even when brought into the focus of the shockwaves. All induced ventricular dysrhythmias were terminated properly regarding artifact sensing. However, after defibrillation, the pacing function of the Ventak Mini cardioverter defibrillator, which was programmed into the demand mode, failed. In this case, there was no post-shock pacing in the period of post-defibrillation asystole. The failure was caused by artifact oversensing. CONCLUSION: In patients with implanted cardiac devices undergoing treatment with a new-generation lithotripter, deactivation of the defibrillator is not mandatory. For safety reasons, continuous ECG recording is recommended. To avoid pacing failure by artifact oversensing, the shockwaves should be applied in a R-wave synchronous mode.

[Usefulness of a VDD defibrillation electrode in recording atrial electrograms during atrial flutter and atrial fibrillation]. / Nutzen einer VDD-Defibrillationselektrode zur Aufzeichnung von atrialen Elektrogrammen bei Vorhofflimmern/-flattern.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring of atrial signals improves the accuracy in identifying supraventricular tachyarrhythmias to prevent inappropriate therapies in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD). Since complications due to the additional atrial lead were found in dual chamber ICD systems with 2 leads, we designed a single-pass VDD-lead for use with dual chamber ICDs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After promising animal experiments in a German multicenter study a prototype VDD lead (single-coil defibrillation electrode with 2 additional fractally coated rings for bipolar sensing in the atrium) was temporarily used in 20 patients. Atrial and ventricular signals were recorded during sinus rhythm, atrial flutter, atrial fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. Terminations of ventricular arrhythmias were performed by internal DC shock. RESULTS: The implantation of the electrode was successful in 18 of 20 patients. Mean atrial pacing threshold was 2.45 +/- 0.9 V/0.5 ms, mean atrial impedance was 215 +/- 31 Ohm. Atrial amplitudes were greater during sinus rhythm (2.7 +/- 1.6 mV) than during atrial flutter (1.36 +/- 0.28 mV, p < 0.05) or atrial fibrillation (0.92 +/- 0.29 mV, p < 0.01). During ventricular fibrillation atrial "sinus"-signals had significantly (p < 0.01) lower amplitudes than during sinus rhythm. Mean ventricular sensing was 13.3 +/- 7.9 mV, mean ventricular impedance was 577 +/- 64 Ohm. Defibrillation was successful with 20 J shock. 99.6% of P waves could be detected in sinus rhythm and 85 +/- 9.9% of flutter waves during atrial flutter. During atrial fibrillation 55% of atrial signals could be detected without modification of the signal amplifier. CONCLUSIONS: A new designed VDD dual chamber electrode provides stable detection of atrial and ventricular signals during sinus rhythm and atrial flutter. For reliable detection of atrial fibrillation modifications of the signal amplifier are necessary.

[Unmasking an exclusively retrograde accessory pathway by catecholamines]. / Demaskierung einer ausschliesslich retrograd leitenden akzessorischen Bahn durch Katecholamine.

A 52-year-old man with frequent episodes of narrow QRS complex tachycardias with rates of 150/min was admitted for electrophysiological evaluation and treatment. P waves could be seen in the ST-segment of the surface ECG during tachycardia. Atrial stimulation during electrophysiological testing was not able to induce tachycardia. During atrial stimulation, there was no evidence of conduction via an accessory pathway or of dual AV node conduction properties. Ventricular stimulation showed complete ventriculoatrial block. After intravenous administration of the catecholamine orciprenaline, single atrial extrastimuli induced an AV macro-reentrant tachycardia with a rate of 165/min. VA conduction showed the earliest retrograde atrial activation in the left anterolateral area. Thus, there was an accessory pathway which only conducted in ventriculoatrial direction and only during adrenergic stimulation. After successful radiofrequency catheter ablation, complete ventriculoatrial block was recorded even after repeat administration of orciprenaline during ventricular stimulation. This case confirms the need to administer catecholamines in every undiagnosed tachycardia during electrophysiological testing to reveal the mechanism of the tachycardia.