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
Review
. 2013 Aug;101(2):141-8.
doi: 10.5935/abc.20130125. Epub 2013 Jul 2.

Inappropriate shocks in patients with ICDs: single chamber versus dual chamber

[Article in English, Portuguese]
Juliana Gonçalves, Telmo Pereira
Review

Inappropriate shocks in patients with ICDs: single chamber versus dual chamber

[Article in English, Portuguese]
Juliana Gonçalves et al. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2013 Aug.

Abstract

Background: Despite the technological evolution of the implantable defibrillator, one of the questions that remains is the possible benefit of the dual chamber versus single chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in reducing inappropriate shocks.

Objective: To evaluate which type of device provides fewer inappropriate shocks (dual chamber versus single chamber) in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).

Methods: Meta-analysis of randomized studies published in the literature comparing dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators to single chamber devices which have been known to cause, as an evaluated endpoint, inappropriate shocks.

Results: The dual-chamber implantable cardioverter showed no benefit in reducing the number of inappropriate shocks. In fact, the opposite was shown. In the analysis of fixed effects, the association tended to favor single-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (OR = 1.53, CI 95%: 0.91-2.57), despite the absence of statistical significance (p = 0.11). We highlight the heterogeneity observed in the results (I² = 53%), which motivated a replication of the analysis using a model of random effects. However, significant differences remained in the occurrence of inappropriate shocks in both groups (OR = 1.1, 95% CI: 0.37-3.31; p = 0.86). To complement the analysis, we proceeded to perform sensitivity analysis, which showed that the exclusion of a study resulted in the lowest heterogeneity observed (I²=24%) and the association with inappropriate shocks significantly favored the single chamber cardiodefibrillator (OR = 1.91; 95% CI: 1.09-3.37; p = 0.27).

Conclusions: It was determined that there was no clear evidence of superiority of any of the devices evaluated.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Potential Conflict of Interest: No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Figure 2
Figure 2
Systematic Review Flowchart. ICD DR: dual chamber cardioverter defibrillator; ICD VR: single chamber cardioverter defibrillator; ICD: cardioverter defibrillator; CRT-D: cardiac resynchronization therapy and defibrillation; CRT-P: cardiac resynchronization therapy.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest Plot representing the model analysis of fixed effect model in the evaluation of the list of patients carriers of dual chamber cardioverter defibrillator versus single chamble cardioverter defibrillator in the occurrence of inappropriate shocks.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest Plot representing the model analysis of random effect in the evaluation of the list of patients. ICD DR: dual chamber cardioverter defibrillator; ICD VR: single chamber cardioverter defibrillator.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Schuchert A, Boriani G, Wollmann C, Biffi M, Kuhl M, Sperzel J, et al. Implantable dual-chamber defibrillator for the selective treatment of spontaneous atrial and ventricular arrhythmias: arrhythmia incidence and device performance. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2005;12(2):149–156. - PubMed
    1. Tzeis S, Andrikopoulos G, Kolb C, Vardas PE. Tools and strategies for the reduction of inappropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks. Europace. 2008;10(11):1256–1265. - PubMed
    1. Dorian P, Philippon F, Thibault B, Kimber S, Sterns L, Greene M, et al. Randomized controlled study of detection enhancements versus rate-only detection to prevent inappropriate therapy in a dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Heart Rhythm. 2004;1(5):540–547. - PubMed
    1. Swerdlow CD. Supraventricular tachycardia-ventricular tachycardia discrimination algorithms in implantable cardioverter defibrillators: state-of-the-art review. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2001;12(5):606–612. - PubMed
    1. Kamousi B, Lin B, Al-Ahmad A, Hsia H, Zei P, Natale A, et al. A covariance-based algorithm. a novel technique for rhythm discrimination in ICDs. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2008;2008:5478–5481. - PubMed