Addition of a defibrillation electrode in the low right atrium to a right ventricular lead does not reduce ventricular defibrillation thresholds

10Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Transvenous unipolar active can defibrillation systems have proven to be effective in treating ventricular tachyarrhythmias. However, a further reduction of ventricular defibrillation thresholds (V-DFT) would increase the longevity, reduce the size of pulse generators, and help to avoid additional leads in patients with inacceptable high V-DFTs. In a finite difference computer model, the extension of the right ventricular (RV) defibrillation coil into the low right atrium led to a 40% reduction of unipolar V-DFT. To evaluate this finding, we conducted a prospective, randomized study in 11 patients receiving an ICD. Extension of the RV electrode was simulated by adding a second coil placed in the low right atrium with the same polarity. Using a binary search protocol, V-DFT was determined with and without the additional electrode in each patient. Total shock impedance was significantly lower in the two coil (low RA) configuration, compared to the single coil (RV) configuration. Corresponding values were 49.9 ± 6.7 Ohm and 61.1 ± 9.3 Ohm, respectively (P < 0.01, paired t-test). However, there was no reduction, but even a nonsignificant increase in V-DFTs. Mean V-DFT in the RV configuration was 12.0 ± 5.6 J and 16.3 ± 7.8 J in the low RA configuration (P = 0.09, paired t-test). Despite a reduction in total impedance, the addition of a defibrillation coil in the low right atrium does not reduce ventricular defibrillation thresholds.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rüb, N., Doernberger, V., Smits, K., Schweitzer, O., Mewis, C., Kettering, K., & Kuehlkamp, V. (2004). Addition of a defibrillation electrode in the low right atrium to a right ventricular lead does not reduce ventricular defibrillation thresholds. PACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 27(3), 346–351. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.2004.00439.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free