Implantable Defibrillators Impedance Measurement Using Pacing Pulses Versus Shock Delivery with Intact and Modified High Voltage Lead System

At present the only method for measuring the high voltage system lead impedance in patients with an ICD is to deliver a low energy test shock. This is painful, requires sedation, and carries a risk of ventricular fibrillation induction. We sought to assess the shock lead and electrode function by calculating IMP using low voltage pacing pulses, and compared it to the measured impedance of a shock through the same lead. This was performed in both an intact and a modified lead system in order to mimic common clinical scenarios that alter lead system IMP (e.g., lead fracture). In an anesthesized canine model (n = 12) a standard (S) transvenous defibrillation lead (TDL), a modified (M) TDL (two‐thirds of coil covered with heat‐shrunk tubing), an active can (AC), and a M epicardial patch (EP) (two of four coils were disconnected) were used. Three configurations (C) were tested: C1: S/TDL→AC;, C2: M/TDL→AC;, and C3: M/TDL→MEP. A measured IMP was obtained by an ICD using a 5‐J shock as control. IMP was calculated using a 5‐J shock, pacing pulses of 10‐, 5‐, 2‐, and 1‐V amplitude, as well as from a square wave drive train of low amplitude/high frequency signals (1 and 0.2 V, at 10 kHz) in all Cs. Ohm's law (V = IR) was utilized for measuring calculated IMP. As the surface area of the high voltage lead system decreased, the mean measured IMP (control) increased from C 1 to 3 (63 ± 10, 95 ± 4, and 127 ± 20 Ω, respectively). The correlation of calculated IMP from all Cs to measured impedance (control) remained high throughout the IMP range (range of correlation coefficient (r): 0.921–0.981). Calculated IMP using delivery of pacing pulses is highly correlated to IMP measured during shock delivery. This correlation remains high over a clinically significant range of high voltage lead system IMP changes. This study suggests that pacing pulses can be used to predict the IMP changes in the high voltage lead system which may occur clinically, reducing the need to deliver a shock for IMP measurement.

[1]  K. Ellenbogen,et al.  Implantable Transvenous Cardioverter Defibrillator Leads: The Dark Side , 1996, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[2]  F. Marchlinski,et al.  Postoperative lead-related complications in patients with nonthoracotomy defibrillation lead systems. , 1995, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  Rodney Gordon Parkin,et al.  960-89 Low Current Impedance: Does It Predict Shock Impedance in Implantable Defibrillators? , 1995 .

[4]  J. Ruskin,et al.  Three-year outcome of a nonthoracotomy approach to cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in 189 consecutive patients. , 1994, The American journal of cardiology.

[5]  M. Schoenfeld,et al.  Troubleshooting Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator System Malfunctions: The Role of Impedance Measurements , 1994, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[6]  J. Silverman,et al.  A review of laboratory animal anesthesia with chloral hydrate and chloralose. , 1993, Laboratory animal science.

[7]  S. Saksena,et al.  Management of complications associated with a first-generation endocardial defibrillation lead system for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. , 1990, The American journal of cardiology.

[8]  G. Klein,et al.  Utility of Low Energy Test Shocks for Estimation of Cardiac and Electrode Impedance with Implantable Defibrillators , 1990, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[9]  P. Troup,et al.  Implantable cardioverters and defibrillators. , 1989, Current problems in cardiology.

[10]  R. Kerber,et al.  Determinants of Intracardiac Current in Defibrillation: Experimental Studies in Dogs , 1981, Circulation.

[11]  J. Moore,et al.  Optimum current duration for capacitor-discharge defibrillation of canine ventricles. , 1969, Journal of applied physiology.