Psychological intolerance to implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Background: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are mobile implantable cardiac devices for immediate treatment of live threatening ventricular arrhythmias. However, these devices can affect patients, physiologically, psychologically and have effects on electrical devices. Case report: The case of a 61-year-old patient is reported. The patient came for regular 3-months visits with his ICD and complained about electromagnetic interference with all household electrical appliances, especially refrigerator and digital television set-top box. He described several phantom shocks when he came close to the electrical appliances. He noted the exact times and symptoms of the episodes but the device memory did not record anything. Conclusion: This case demonstrates the rare occurrence of psychological intolerance to implanted ICD shortly after implant. The device was programmed for higher sensitivity. The patient was calmed and reassured about the reprogramming.     

Morphological detection algorithms for the automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (AICD).

To prevent sudden cardiac death of patients who are at risk from long standing tachyarrhythmia the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is the first choice therapy. ICDs use a range of electrostimuli up to defibrillation, which is a non synchronous high energy shock, whereas cardioversion is synchronous with the ECG. In order to know when and how to react, a detection algorithm, which analyses an intracardial electrocardiogram (ECG) and classifies the heart rhythm, is implemented in every ICD. All detection algorithms use the heart rate to classify the different heart rhythms roughly. If a tachycardia is detected, it is important to discriminate between a ventricular tachycardia, which is life threatening and a supraventricular tachycardia, which is much less threatening. To be able to make this distinction the detection algorithms analyse the behaviour of the heart cycle intervals, the ECG-morphology or in addition to the ventricular ECG, an atrial ECG. In this paper morphological algorithms will be evaluated and newly developed algorithms will be presented. Recent algorithms use the mathematical wavelet theory. The evaluation shows that these get better results than all but one of the simpler classical morphological algorithms. A new wavelet based algorithm, developed by the authors, exhibits the best detection results.     

A Canadian hospital's experience with the automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator.

The automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator is a device that can be implanted in patients for treatment of recurrent ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation. It was recently approved for clinical use in Canada. The authors describe their experience with 12 patients (mean age 51.3 years) who underwent implantation of a defibrillator. All 12 patients had a history of documented ventricular fibrillation, which was idiopathic in 3 and due to ischemic heart disease in 9. Electrophysiologic testing revealed inducible ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation in 8 of the 10 patients tested. An important criterion for selection for implantation was failure of pharmacologic therapy to suppress ventricular arrhythmias induced during electrophysiologic testing. Of the 12 patients, 1 died within 24 hours after implantation. During a mean follow-up period of 15.5 months there were no further deaths. All the surviving patients expressed satisfaction with the device; five of the seven under the age of 60 years have returned to work, and one has returned to school. This initial favourable experience with the automatic implantable cardioverter/defibrillator suggests that future increases in the availability of the device and improvements in its function will lead to much more widespread use, as the population of patients at risk of sudden cardiac death is large.     

Driving restrictions for Dutch patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Background

Dutch patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) are restricted from driving for two months after implantation or shocks. This requires significant lifestyle adjustments and is one of the primary concerns of ICD patients. Previous studies indicated that compliance with the driving restrictions is poor, but insight in socio-demographic, clinical and psychological factors associated with compliance is limited. Hence, this study aimed to explore compliance with the driving restrictions and associated factors in a large sample of Dutch ICD patients.

Method

Dutch ICD patients (N = 313) completed an elaborative set of questionnaires at time of implantation and at four months after implantation, assessing socio-demographic, psychological and driving-related characteristics. Clinical data were collected from the patients’ medical records.

Results

A substantial subgroup (28%) of the patient sample (median age 64 (interquartile range = 55–71), 81% male) reported to have been noncompliant with the driving restrictions. Univariate analysis indicated that noncompliant patients more often considered refusing the ICD due to the restrictions, compared to compliant patients (19% versus 10%, p = 0.02). Multivariate analysis showed that the feeling of understanding the reason behind the driving restrictions was associated with better compliance (odds ratio = 2.16, 95% confidence interval 1.02–4.56, p = 0.04). No other socio-demographic, clinical, psychological or driving-related factors were associated with compliance.

Conclusion

A large number of ICD patients does not comply with the driving restrictions after implantation. This study emphasised the importance of the patient’s feeling of understanding the reason behind the restrictions.

     

Incidence and predictors of phantom shocks in implantable cardioverter defibrillator recipients

Background

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are designed to deliver shocks or antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in the event of ventricular arrhythmias. During follow-up, some ICD recipients experience the sensation of ICD discharge in the absence of an actual discharge (phantom shock). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and predictors of phantom shocks in ICD recipients.

Methods

Medical records of 629 consecutive patients with ischaemic or dilated cardiomyopathy and prior ICD implantation were studied.

Results

With a median follow-up of 35 months, phantom shocks were reported by 5.1 % of ICD recipients (5.7 % in the primary prevention group and 3.7 % for the secondary prevention group; p=NS). In the combined group of primary and secondary prevention, there were no significant predictors of the occurrence of phantom shocks. However, in the primary prevention group, phantom shocks were related to a history of atrial fibrillation (p=0.03) and NYHA class <III (p=0.05). In the secondary prevention group, there were no significant predictors for phantom shocks.

Conclusion

Phantom shocks occur in approximately 5 % of all ICD recipients. In primary prevention patients, a relation with a history of atrial fibrillation and NYHA class <III were significant predictors for the occurrence of phantom shocks. In the secondary prevention patients, no significant predictors were found.     

A cracking complication: Displacement of existing clavicle fracture complicating subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation

An 18 year old male with an incompletely healed clavicle fracture presented with unexplained syncope. Subsequent investigations were consistent with a diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). A subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) was successfully implanted and defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing performed as per standard protocol. Shortly following the procedure, the patient complained of pain and swelling over the left clavicle. A radiograph revealed aggravation and displacement of the underlying clavicle fracture. Surgical reduction and internal fixation was performed one week later.     

An unusual cause of recurrent syncope in a patient with implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Electromagnetic interferences (EMI) deriving from electrical devices may affect implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD). Improved algorithms have been developed in order to minimize adverse effects. However, caution should be still recommended in ICD recipients when handling electrical devices. Here we describe the case of an ICD patient with recurrent syncopal episodes due to inhibition of pacing by oversensing of electrical noise from a not properly grounded washing machine.     

Trends in implantable cardioverter defibrillator and cardiac resynchronisation therapy lead parameters for patients with arrhythmogenic and dilated cardiomyopathies

Background

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead parameters may deteriorate due to right ventricular (RV) disease such as arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC), with implications for safe delivery of therapies. We compared ICD and CRT-D (cardiac resynchronisation therapy-defibrillator) lead parameters in patients with ARVC and dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).

Implantation of a resynchronization implantable cardioverter defibrillator in a patient with persistent left superior vena cava

Implantation of resynchronization implantable cardioverter defibrillator was performed in a patient with persistent left superior vena cava. A dual coil defibrillation lead was inserted in the right ventricle apex via a small innominate vein. Left ventricular and atrial leads were implanted through persistent left superior vena cava. Left ventricular lead was easily implanted into the postero lateral vein. Pacing thresholds and sensing values were excellent and remained stable at 18 months follow-up.Presence of persistent left superior vena cava generally makes transvenous lead implantation difficult. However when a favorable coronary sinus anatomy is also present, it may facilitate left ventricular lead positioning in the coronary sinus branches.     

Non-invasive evaluation of ventricular refractoriness and its dispersion during ventricular fibrillation in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Background

Despite improvements in the safety and efficacy of endovascular procedures, considerable morbidity may still be attributed to vasospasm. Vasospasm has proven amenable to pharmacological intervention such as nitrates, intravenous calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and intra-arterial papaverine, particularly in small vessels. However, few studies have focused on medium to large vessel spasm. Here we report the use of an intra-arterial CCB, verapamil, to treat flow-limiting mechanically-induced spasm of the common carotid artery (CCA) in a primate. We believe this to be the first such report of its kind.

Case presentation

As part of a study assessing the placement feasibility and safety of a catheter capable of delivering intra-arterial cerebroprotective therapy, a female 16 kg baboon prophylaxed with intravenous nitroglycerin underwent transfemoral CCA catheterization with a metallic 6-Fr catheter without signs of acute spasm. The protocol dictated that the catheter remain in the CCA for 12 hours. Upon completion of the protocol, arteriography revealed a marked decrease in CCA size (mean cross-sectional area reduction = 31.6 ± 1.9%) localized along the catheter length. Intra-arterial verapamil (2 mg/2cc) was injected and arteriography was performed 10 minutes later. Image analysis at 6 points along the CCA revealed a 21.0 ± 1.7% mean increase in vessel diameter along the length of the catheter corresponding to a 46.7 ± 4.0% mean increase in cross-sectional area. Mean systemic blood pressure did not deviate more than 10 mm Hg during the procedure.

Conclusions

Intraluminal CCBs like verapamil may constitute an effective endovascular treatment for mechanically-induced vasospasm in medium to large-sized vessels such as the CCA.     

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator: an update

Automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator is now a well established therapy to prevent sudden cardiac death. In secondary prevention (patients with a previous cardiac arrest) defibrillator can be considered as a class I indication, if there is no transient or reversible cause. The level of proof is A. in primary prevention the defibrillator is indicated in coronary artery disease patients with or without symptoms of mild to moderate heart failure (NYHA II or III), an ejection fraction lower than 30 %, measured at least one month after a myocardial infarction and 3 months after a revascularisation, surgery or angioplasty (level of proof B). It is also indicated in symptomatic spontaneous sustained ventricular tachycardias with underlying heart disease (level of proof B), in patients with spontaneous sustained ventricular tachycardia, poorly tolerated, without underlying heart disease for which pharmacological treatment or ablation can not be performed or failed (level of proof B). Finally it is also indicated in patients with syncope of unknown cause with sustained ventricular tachycardia or inducible ventricular fibrillation, with an underlying heart disease (level of proof B). The guidelines proposed by the different societies have also proposed class IIa recommendations which are the following: coronary artery disease patients with left ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction between 31 or 35 %) measured at least one month after a myocardial infarction and 3 months after a revascularisation with an inducible ventricular arrhythmia. It can be also indicated in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathies with an ejection fraction lower than 30% and NYHA class II or III. It can be also indicated in familial or inherited conditions with a high risk of sudden cardiac death by ventricular fibrillation without any other efficient known treatment and finally in heart failure patients remaining symptomatic, in class III or IV NYHA, with an optimal medical therapy, an ejection fraction lower than 35 % and a QRS complex duration higher than 120 ms: in this case it is an indication of cardiac resynchronization therapy device associated to the defibrillator. All these class IIa indications have a level of proof B.     

Interaction between shock coils increased the incidence of inappropriate therapies and lead failure in implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Aims

Shock coil interaction in patients with multiple implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads is occasionally observed. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of shock coil interaction and its clinical relevance.

Remote monitoring in implantable defibrillator therapy

The major device manufacturers have introduced systems for remote patient monitoring. These remote monitoring systems promise more efficient patient management, especially in today’s clinical setting with the growing number of defibrillator implantations. The aim of this article is to present the role of remote patient monitoring in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator follow-up, its potential benefits and its barriers to widespread diffusion. (Neth Heart J 2008;16:53-6.)     

Premature ventricular contractions in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator cardiac resynchronization therapy device: Results from the UMBRELLA registry

BackgroundPremature ventricular contractions (PVC) are known to reduce the percentage of biventricular (BiV) pacing in patients with cardiac resynchronization (CRT), decreasing the clinical response. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of a high PVC burden, as well as therapeutic action (pharmacotherapy, catheter ablation or device programming), in a large CRT implantable-defibrillator (CRT-D) population.MethodsPatients with a CRT-D device from the UMBRELLA multicenter prospective remote monitoring registry were included. The PVC count was collected from each remote monitoring transmission. Patients were divided into two high (≥1 transmission ≥200/≥400 PVC/h, respectively) and one low (all transmissions <200 PVC/h) PVC count groups. The PVC burden following a high PVC count transmission was calculated.ResultsOf 1268 patients, 135 (11%) and 43 (3.4%) presented high PVC count (≥200/≥400 PVC/h, respectively). The majority of patients in the high PVC groups were not treated (61 [79%] and 32 [74%], respectively. Considering the untreated patients in the high PVC groups, median PVC/h was 199 (interquartile range [IQR]: 196) and 271 (IQR: 330), respectively. The PVC burden (proportion of time with PVC/h ≥ 200/≥400) was 40% (IQR 70) and 29% (IQR 59), respectively.ConclusionA significant proportion of CRT-D patients presented a high PVC count, however, few received treatment. In the untreated patients with a high PVC count, the PVC burden during follow-up varied substantially. Several consecutive recordings of a high PVC count should be warranted before considering therapeutic action such as catheter ablation.