These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: High defibrillation energy requirements are encountered rarely with modern dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems.
    Author: Day JD, Olshansky B, Moore S, Brown S, Stolen KQ, Lerew DR, INTRINSIC RV Study Investigators.
    Journal: Europace; 2008 Mar; 10(3):347-50. PubMed ID: 18308755.
    Abstract:
    AIMS: Defibrillation conversion testing to assure a 10 J safety margin is a standard practice during implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation. Little data are available on the number of patients who do not have a 10 J margin initially and therefore require system revisions, further testing, or a higher energy output device. METHODS AND RESULTS: The INTRINSIC RV study enrolled 1530 new ICD recipients who were not in permanent atrial fibrillation who received a VITALITY AVT (Guidant, St Paul, MN, USA) standard energy (31 J maximum) ICD and underwent defibrillation conversion testing at the time of implantation from 108 centres. Among enrolled patients, 59 (3.9%) did not initially meet the 10 J safety margin criterion. In these 59 patients, a 10 J safety margin was achieved by making at least one system revision: reversing shocking polarity (n = 33, 56%), right ventricular lead repositioning (n = 19, 32%), repeat testing at a later date (n = 1, 2%), adding a subcutaneous array (n = 1, 2%), or other means (n = 10, 17%). Only New York Heart Association class (P = 0.001) and no previous myocardial infarction (P = 0.044) predicted a failed initial conversion test. There were no reported complications from ICD shock testing. CONCLUSION: Successful defibrillation conversion criteria with the first configuration tested with a standard energy device is almost always met with modern dual-chamber ICD systems. The need for revising the initial ICD shock configuration to achieve a 10 J safety margin appears extremely low and of low risk.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]