An effective and adaptable transvenous defibrillation system using the coronary sinus in humans

With use of a coronary sinus catheter electrode, a right ventricular catheter electrode and a chest wall patch electrode system, defibrillation threshold voltage, current and energy were measured with four distinct transvenous defibrillation techniques delivered in random sequence in each of 12 survivors of cardiac arrest immediately before implantation of a standard epicardial patch defibrillation system. The four transvenous defibrillation techniques were 1) single pathway monophasic pulsing, 2) single pathway biphasic pulsing, 3) dual pathway sequential pulsing, and 4) dual pathway simultaneous pulsing. A transvenous defibrillation method was considered to be potentially useful only if the defibrillation threshold was ≤500 V (≤15 J delivered energy). The 500 V value would allow a 2:1 defibrillation safety margin for a device with a maximal output of 30 J.No single transvenous pulsing technique was uniformly superior in efficacy. However, by choosing the best pulsing technique for each patient, it was possible to obtain an average defibrillation threshold of 410 ± 135 V leading edge voltage, 7.2 ± 2.5 A leading edge current and 11.3 ± 7.4 J delivered energy for the group of 12 patients. With the ability to vary defibrillation technique, transvenous antiarrhythmic device implantation would have been possible in 10 (83%) of the 12 patients at or below a 15 J defibrillation threshold cutoff point. In contrast, if only one transvenous defibrillation method had been used, as few as 5 and at most 8 of the 12 patients would have been candidates for a transvenous defibrillation system given a 15 J defibrillation threshold cutoff point for insertion. The ability to vary defibrillation technique and current pathways not only increased the number of patients suitable for transvenous defibrillator implantation, but also improved the delivered energy safety margin from approximately 2:1 to 3:1 in comparison with that of any one of the four methods examined

Multicenter experience with a pectoral unipolar implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to prospectively examine in a multicenter study the methods of use, efficacy and complications of a unipolar cardioverter defibrillator in patients at risk for sudden cardiac death. Background: Implantation of cardioverter-defibrillators in the pectoral region offers a significant opportunity to improve the management of patients with life-threatening arrhythmias. Unipolar, single-lead, pectoral implantable cardioverter-defibrillators might decrease related mortality, morbidity and costs in the care of such patients, Methods: From November 3, 1993 to May 8, 1995, a unipolar defibrillator (Medtronic model 7219C) was selected for use in 473 patients from 74 centers (386 [82%] men, 87 [18%] women; mean [+/-SD] age 59 +/- 13 years, range 16 to 88). The clinical indication for use was ventricular fibrillation in 157 patients, sustained ventricular tachycardia in 236, both ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation in 53 and syncope or inducible ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in 27. Coronary artery disease was present in 323 patients (68%). The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.36 +/- 0.15 (range 0.10 to 0.85). The distribution of New York Heart Association congestive heart failure was class I = 34%; class II = 45%; class III = 17%; and class IV = 2%. Results: The unipolar cardioverter-defibrillator was inserted successfully in 464 (98%) of 473 candidates, Effective defibrillation occurred with the first shock polarity tested in 88% of patients, after a polarity switch in 8% and after lead or generator repositioning in 2%, The stored energy defibrillation threshold was obtained at implantation in 339 patients (72%) and was 11.5 +/- 6.1 J, with 72% of patients having a defibrillation threshold less than or equal to 12 J. The mean ''skin to skin'' implantation time was 96 +/- 45 min (range 25 to 335 min). Complications occurred in 29 patients (6%), Device therapy for 2,160 spontaneous ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation episodes occurred in 128 patients (27%) over a 2,732 device month experience (range 0 to 17.2) and was effective in 98.7% of episodes. There were 14 deaths (10 nonsudden cardiac, 3 sudden cardiac, 1 noncardiac). Cumulative survival, on an intention to-treat basis from all causes of death at 17.2 months, was 94.4%. Conclusions: Unipolar pectoral implantable cardioverter-defibrillators can be inserted with a high likelihood of success in a relatively brief procedure. Defibrillation thresholds are low, morbidity is modest, and survival rates are good with this new type of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Data from: Development and validation of warning system of ventricular tachyarrhythmia in patients with heart failure with heart rate variability data

Implantable-cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) detect and terminate life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmia with electric shocks after they occur. This puts patients at risk if they are driving or in a situation where they can fall. ICD’s shocks are also very painful and affect a patient’s quality of life. It would be ideal if ICDs can accurately predict the occurrence of ventricular tachyarrhythmia and then issue a warning or provide preventive therapy. Our study explores the use of ICD data to automatically predict ventricular arrhythmia using heart rate variability (HRV). A 5 minute and a 10 second warning system are both developed and compared. The participants for this study consist of 788 patients who were enrolled in the ICD arm of the Sudden Cardiac Death – Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT). Two groups of patient rhythms, regular heart rhythms and pre-ventricular-tachyarrhythmic rhythms, are analyzed and different HRV features are extracted. Machine learning algorithms, including random forests (RF) and support vector machines (SVM), are trained on these features to classify the two groups of rhythms in a subset of the data comprising the training set. These algorithms are then used to classify rhythms in a separate test set. This performance is quantified by the area under the curve (AUC) of the ROC curve. Both RF and SVM methods achieve a mean AUC of 0.81 for 5-minute prediction and mean AUC of 0.87-0.88 for 10-second prediction; an AUC over 0.8 typically warrants further clinical investigation. Our work shows that moderate classification accuracy can be achieved to predict ventricular tachyarrhythmia with machine learning algorithms using HRV features from ICD data. These results provide a realistic view of the practical challenges facing implementation of machine learning algorithms to predict ventricular tachyarrhythmia using HRV data, motivating continued research on improved algorithms and additional features with higher predictive power

Tocainide for drug-resistant sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias

AbstractEighty-two patients with drug-resistant ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation were treated with oral tocainide. Treatment in 54 patients, all with inducible ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation at baseline electrophysiologic testing, was based on the results of invasive electrophysiologic testing. Twenty-eight additional patients with frequent spontaneous ventricular tachycardia or no inducible arrhythmia during electrophysiologic testing were treated on the basis of the findings of electrocardiographic (ECG) Holter monitoring.Tocainide was effective in 7 (13%) and partially effective in 5 (8%) of the 54 patients in the electrophysiologic study group and was effective in 17 (61%) of the 28 patients in the ECG monitoring group. History of previous myocardial infarction and failure of response to lidocaine correlated with failure to respond to tocainide. Side effects were common both during initial therapy and during long-term treatment and necessitated discontinuation of tocainide therapy in 17% of the patients. At a mean follow-up period of 14 months, 13 patients are still receiving tocainide and are arrhythmia-free.In conclusion, the usefulness of oral tocainide in the management of drug-refractory sustained ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation is limited because of its low effectiveness and frequent side effects