Inappropriate Shock Delivered By Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator - Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (ICD-CRT) Due To Myopotential Oversensing

The clinical efficacy of ICD-CRT therapy depends on accurate sensing of intracardiac signals and sensing algorithms. We report the occurrence of sensing abnormality in a patient with ICD-CRT. In this patient, oversensing of myopotentials during strenuous muscular activity resulted in an inappropriate ICD-CRT discharge. Although modern ICDs are highly effective in detecting and terminating malignant tachyarrhythmias, their detection specificity must be improved. It is possible to find the mechanism of arrhythmia by EGM. Simple device reprogramming make it possible to avoid the oversensing of myopotentials.     

High Defibrillation Threshold: The Science,Signs and Solutions

Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing has traditionally been an integral part of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation. With the increasing number of patients receiving ICDs, physicians are encountering high DFT more often than before. Tackling the problem of high DFT, warrants an in-depth understanding of the science of defibrillation including the key electrophysiological concepts and the underlying molecular mechanisms. Numerous factors have been implicated in the causation of high DFT. Due consideration to the past medical history, pharmacotherapy, laboratory data and cardiac imaging, help in assessing the pre-procedural risk for occurrence of high DFT. Drugs, procedural changes, type and location of ICD lead system are some of the key players in predicting DFT during implantation. In the event of encountering an unacceptably high DFT, we recommend to follow a step-wise algorithm. Ruling out procedural complications like pneumothorax and tamponade is imperative before embarking on a search for potentially reversible clinical or metabolic derangements. Finally, if these attempts fail, the electrophysiologist must choose from a wide range of options for device adjustment and system modification. Although this review article is meant to be a treatise on the science, signs and solutions for high DFT, it is bound by limitations of space and scope of the article.     

Shoulder Joint Dislocation as an Unusual Complication of Defibrillation Threshold Testing Following Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation

A 53-year-old man underwent implantation of a totally subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD; Boston Scientific). He was positioned supine, with the left arm abducted, externally rotated (i.e. palm up) and strapped to the arm extender. The generator was placed in the left mid-axillary line along the 5th-6th intercostal spaces and the defibrillation coil was tunneled anterior to the sternum. Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing with 65 Jcaused a forceful pectoralis twitch. The patient woke up with a painful anteriorly dislocated left shoulder. Glenohumeral dislocation due to DFT testing has not been previously reported. It is likely that this complication is specific to the S-ICD implantation, and is related to positioning with the arm abducted, externally rotated, and immobilized, and use of greater defibrillation energy with current pathway through the bulk of the pectoralis muscle.Precautions may include extending the arm palm down, strapping the arm loosely, and adduction of the arm for DFT testing.     

A New Single Chamber Implantable Defibrillator with Atrial Sensing: A Practical Demonstration of Sensing and Ease of Implantation

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) terminate ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) with high efficacy and can protect patients from sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, inappropriate shocks may occur if tachycardias are misdiagnosed. Inappropriate shocks are harmful and impair patient quality of life. The risk of inappropriate therapy increases with lower detection rates programmed in the ICD. Single-chamber detection poses greater risks for misdiagnosis when compared with dual-chamber devices that have the benefit of additional atrial information. However, using a dual-chamber device merely for the sake of detection is generally not accepted, since the risks associated with the second electrode may outweigh the benefits of detection. Therefore, BIOTRONIK developed a ventricular lead called the Linox^SMART S DX, which allows for the detection of atrial signals from two electrodes positioned at the atrial part of the ventricular electrode. This device contains two ring electrodes; one that contacts the atrial wall at the junction of the superior vena cava (SVC) and one positioned at the free floating part of the electrode in the atrium. The excellent signal quality can only be achieved by a special filter setting in the ICD (Lumax 540 and 740 VR-T DX, BIOTRONIK). Here, the ease of implantation of the system will be demonstrated.     

Inadvertent Lead Placement In The Left Ventricle: A Case Report And Brief Review

Inadvertent lead placement in the left ventricle (LV) is an uncommon and often under-diagnosed complication of cardiac device implantation. Thromboembolic (TE) events are common and usually secondary to fibrosis or thrombus formation on or around the lead. Anticoagulation can prevent TE events. Percutaneous and surgical LV lead extractions have been performed successfully, but the risks of percutaneous lead removal are not well-defined. In this report, we describe a case of inadvertent LV lead placement and briefly review the contemporary literature.     

The Use of a Quadripolar Left Ventricular Lead Increases Successful Implantation Rates in Patients with Phrenic Nerve Stimulation and/or High Pacing Thresholds Undergoing Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy with Conventional Bipolar Leads

BackgroundPhrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) and high pacing thresholds (HPT) hinder biventricular stimulation in patients (pts) undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). A new quadripolar left ventricular (LV) lead (Quartet 1458Q, St. Jude Medical) with increased number of pacing configuration, might overcome this problem.MethodsAll consecutive pts in whom a standard bipolar lead intraoperatively resulted in PNS and/or HPT (≥ 4.00 V/1 mV), received, during the same implant, a quadripolar LV lead. Aim of the study was to evaluate acute and short term outcome.Results26 pts [24 (92%) male, mean age 74 ± 6 years)] with PNS (22 pts; 85%) and HPT (4 pts; 15%) were included. Permanent right ventricular pacing was the reason for broad QRS complex in 4 (15%) pts, whereas all other pts had a left bundle branch block. Severely symptomatic (NYHA Class ≥ 3) heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (EF 31 ± 9%) was mostly caused by ischemic heart disease (14 pts; 54%). Idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and valvular heart disease were diagnosed in 6 (23%) pts each. In most (24/26, 92%) pts the use of the Quartet lead led to successful biventricular pacing due to a significant reduction in intraoperative pacing threshold (5.2 V/1.0 ms vs. 1.4 V/0.8 ms; p = 0.03), which was maintained (1.2 V/0.7 ms) at follow-up. PNS never represented reason for failed LV pacing, neither acutely nor during follow-up.ConclusionsExcessively HPT and/or PNS are frequently encountered when conventional bipolar leads are used for CRT. A new quadripolar LV lead increases the rate of successful biventricular stimulation. Lower pacing threshold and freedom from PNS are maintained at follow-up.