Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Aug 1;7(3):166-75.

Defibrillation testing of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator: when, how, and by whom?

Luis A Pires  1
Affiliations

Defibrillation testing of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator: when, how, and by whom?

Luis A Pires. Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J. .

Abstract

The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) has become an integral part of treatment for a variety of patients with symptomatic, or at risk for, ventricular tachyarrhythmias. The ICD's effectiveness is attributed to its ability to promptly detect and terminate ventricular tachycardia (VT) and fibrillation (VF). The clinical trials that established the positive role of ICD therapy were based on patients who underwent some form of defibrillation testing at the time of implantation. Therefore, since its advent, intraoperative defibrillation testing of the ICD to assure reliable detection and termination of VT/VF has been a standard practice. But because of advances in defibrillator and lead technology, which now facilitates successful device implantation (i.e., low defibrillation energy requirement to allow for an adequate programmed safety margin) in the majority of patients, the necessity of defibrillation testing has been called into attention. Despite substantial progress, it is not altogether clear whether a wholesale abandonment of intraoperative ICD testing is appropriate at this point. We review pertinent data regarding pros and cons of ICD testing and offer a suggestion as to when, how, and who should test ICDs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
From top to bottom: atrial electrograms, ventricular electrograms, and marker channel. AS and VS indicates, respectively, atrial sensing and ventricular sensing. Shows an episode of induced ventricular fibrillation (dotted arrow) followed by a single successful 11 J shock (arrow) delivered by a 31 J output device.
Figure 2
Figure 2
From top to bottom: atrial electrograms, ventricular electrograms, and marker channel. The tracing is continuous (top to bottom panel). Shows an episode of induced ventricular fibrillation (dotted arrow) followed by a failed 15 J shock (arrow), followed by a second successful 25 J shock (open arrow) delivered by a 35 J output device. AS and VS indicates, respectively, atrial and ventricular sensing.
Figure 3
Figure 3
A suggested approach to intraoperative ICD testing. See text for details.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Connolly SJ, Hallstrom AP, Cappato R, et al. Metanalysis of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator secondary prevention trials: AVID, CASH and CIDS studies. Eur heart J. 2000;21:2071–2078. - PubMed
    1. Moss AJ, Hall WJ, Cannom DS, et al. Improved survival with an implanted defibrillator in patients with coronary disease at high risk for ventricular arrhythmia. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1933–1940. - PubMed
    1. Buxton AE, Lee KL, Fisher JD, et al. A randomized study of the prevention of sudden death in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1882–1890. - PubMed
    1. Moss AJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ, et al. Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction (The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Trial II) N Engl J Med. 2002;346:877–883. - PubMed
    1. Gregoratos G, Abrams J, Epstein AE. ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline update for implantation of cardiac pacemakers and antiarrhythmic devices - summary article. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1703–1719. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources