How to Manage a High Defibrillation Threshold in ICD Patients: and Does it Really Matter?
- PMID: 23591908
- DOI: 10.1007/s11936-013-0244-7
How to Manage a High Defibrillation Threshold in ICD Patients: and Does it Really Matter?
Abstract
In the 30 years since its introduction, implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) hardware and programming has evolved greatly. Coupled with a better understanding of how patient factors and anti-arrhythmic drug therapy affect ICD function, these changes have resulted in a modern ICD system which is highly effective at terminating ventricular arrhythmias. This has led to a marked decrease in the conduct of intraoperative defibrillation testing. Still, clinicians are faced with patients who have had unsuccessful intraoperative defibrillation testing or who have experienced one or more failed clinical shocks for ventricular arrhythmias. Thus, clinicians caring for ICD patients must understand the expected performance of modern ICD systems, understand the issues with intraoperative defibrillation testing, and have a strategy for dealing with patients when their ICD has failed to terminate a clinical or induced ventricular arrhythmia. This review will focus on the clinical approach to such patients, including trouble-shooting and system revision.
Similar articles
-
Impact of Body Mass Index on Safety and Efficacy of the Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator.JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 May;4(5):652-659. doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2017.11.019. Epub 2018 Feb 2. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018. PMID: 29798794 Clinical Trial.
-
[Safety and efficacy of intraoperative defibrillation threshold measured by defibrillation safety margin in 52 patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator].Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 2010 Nov;38(11):975-8. Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 2010. PMID: 21215224 Chinese.
-
Intraoperative Defibrillation Testing of Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Systems-A Simple Issue?J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Mar 15;5(3):e003181. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.003181. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016. PMID: 27068637 Free PMC article.
-
The dilemma of ICD implant testing.Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2007 May;30(5):675-700. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2007.00730.x. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2007. PMID: 17461879 Review.
-
2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing.Heart Rhythm. 2020 Jan;17(1):e220-e228. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.02.034. Epub 2019 May 15. Heart Rhythm. 2020. PMID: 31103461 Review.
Cited by
-
ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing--The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial.PLoS One. 2015 Jul 24;10(7):e0131570. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131570. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 26208329 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Traumatic Tension Pneumothorax as a Cause of ICD Failure: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.Case Rep Cardiol. 2014;2014:261705. doi: 10.1155/2014/261705. Epub 2014 Oct 7. Case Rep Cardiol. 2014. PMID: 25400953 Free PMC article.
-
Analysis of Temporal Trends and Variation in the Use of Defibrillation Testing in Contemporary Practice.JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Oct 2;2(10):e1913553. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.13553. JAMA Netw Open. 2019. PMID: 31626314 Free PMC article.
-
Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Arrhythm. 2018 Sep 3;34(6):598-606. doi: 10.1002/joa3.12109. eCollection 2018 Dec. J Arrhythm. 2018. PMID: 30555603 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators for Secondary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: A Review.J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Mar 3;6(3):e005515. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.005515. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017. PMID: 28258050 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
References
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources