Electrical Stimulation for Low-Energy Termination of Cardiac Arrhythmias: a Review.

Cardiac arrhythmias are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the developed world, estimated to be responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths annually. Our understanding of the electrophysiological mechanisms of such arrhythmias has grown since they were formally characterized in the late nineteenth century, and this has led to the development of numerous devices and therapies that have markedly improved outcomes for patients affected by such conditions. Despite these advancements, the application of a single large shock remains the clinical standard for treating deadly tachyarrhythmias. Such defibrillating shocks are undoubtedly effective in terminating such arrhythmias; however, they are applied without forewarning, contributing to the patient's stress and anxiety; they can be intensely painful; and they can have adverse psychological and physiological effects on patients. In recent years, there has been interest in developing defibrillation protocols that can terminate arrhythmias without crossing the human pain threshold for energy delivery, generally estimated to be between 0.1 and 1 J. In this article, we review existing literature on the development of such low-energy defibrillation methods and their underlying mechanisms, in an attempt to broadly describe the current landscape of these technologies.

The Purkinje network plays a major role in low-energy ventricular defibrillation.

BACKGROUND: During ventricular fibrillation (VF), targeting the excitable gap (EG) of reentry throughout the myocardium with low-energy surface stimulation shows promise for painless defibrillation. However, the Purkinje network may provide alternative pathways for reentry to evade termination. This study investigates the role of the Purkinje network in painless defibrillation. METHODS: In a computational human biventricular model featuring a Purkinje network, VF was initiated with 4 Hz epicardial pacing. Defibrillation was attempted by stimulating myocardial surface EG with a low-energy 2 ms duration pulse at 2x stimulus capture, which was administered at coupling intervals incremented by 0.25 s between 0.25 and 5 s after VF initiation. Defibrillation was accomplished if reentry ceased ≤ 1 s after the defibrillation pulse. The protocol was repeated with the Purkinje network and myocardial surface EG stimulated simultaneously, and again after uncoupling the Purkinje network from the myocardium. RESULTS: VF with the Purkinje network coupled and uncoupled had comparable dominant frequency in the left (3.81 ± 0.44 versus 3.77 ± 0.53 Hz) and right (3.80 ± 0.37 versus 3.76 ± 0.48 Hz) ventricles. When uncoupling the Purkinje network, myocardial surface EG stimulation terminated VF for all defibrillation pulses. When coupled, myocardial EG surface stimulation terminated VF for only 55% of the defibrillation pulses, but improved to 100% when stimulated simultaneously with Purkinje network EG. Defibrillation failures were attributed to EG evading stimulation in the Purkinje network. CONCLUSIONS: Defibrillation that exclusively targets myocardium can fail due to accessory pathways in the Purkinje network that allow for reentrant activity to evade termination and maintain VF. Painless defibrillation strategies should be adapted to include the Purkinje network.