Lead system optimization for transvenous defibrillation.

Lead systems that include an active pectoral shell reduce defibrillation thresholds and permit transvenous defibrillation in nearly all patients. A further improvement in defibrillation efficacy is desirable to allow for smaller pulse generators with a reduced maximum output. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare defibrillation thresholds with multiple transvenous lead systems including those with an active pectoral shell to determine which system would optimize defibrillation energy requirements. This prospective study was performed on 21 consecutive patients. Each subject was evaluated with 3 lead configurations with the order of testing randomized. The configurations were a dual coil transvenous lead (lead), the distal right ventricular coil and pectoral pulse generator shell (unipolar), and all 3 components (triad). The right ventricular coil was the cathode for the first phase of the biphasic defibrillation waveform. Delivered energy at defibrillation threshold was 11.2 +/- 3.4 J for the lead configuration, 10.1 +/- 5.2 J for the unipolar configuration, and 7.8 +/- 3.6 J for the triad configuration (p <0.01). Leading edge voltage (p <0.01) and shock impedance (p <0.001) were also decreased for the triad configuration compared with the lead or unipolar configurations, whereas peak current was minimized with the unipolar configuration (p <0.01). We conclude that the combination of a dual coil, transvenous lead and an active pectoral shell reduces defibrillation energy requirements compared with either the lead alone or unipolar configuration. Moreover, the defibrillation thresholds were < or =15 J in all patients using the triad lead system.

[1]  R. Fletcher,et al.  Optimization of Biphasic Waveforms for Human Nonthoracotomy Defibrillation , 1993, Circulation.

[2]  P. Kudenchuk,et al.  Efficacy of a single-lead unipolar transvenous defibrillator compared with a system employing an additional coronary sinus electrode. A prospective, randomized study. , 1994, Circulation.

[3]  F. Venditti,et al.  Increase in defibrillation threshold in non-thoracotomy implantable defibrillators using a biphasic waveform. , 1995, The American journal of cardiology.

[4]  D. Shahian,et al.  Transvenous Cardioverter Defibrillators: Cost Implications of a Less Invasive Approach , 1995, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[5]  P. Wolf,et al.  Current Concepts for Selecting the Location, Size and Shape of Defibrillation Electrodes , 1991, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[6]  M. Gold,et al.  Effects of waveform and polarity on defibrillation thresholds in humans using a transvenous lead system. , 1996, The American journal of cardiology.

[7]  C. Haffajee,et al.  A Multicenter, Randomized Trial Comparing an Active Can Implantable Defibrillator with a Passive Can System , 1997 .

[8]  Peng-Sheng Chen,et al.  Short Biphasic Pulses from 90 Microfarad Capacitors Lower Defibrillation Threshold , 1996, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[9]  George A. Johnson,et al.  Prospective, randomized comparison in humans of a unipolar defibrillation system with that using an additional superior vena cava electrode. , 1994, Circulation.

[10]  P. Kudenchuk,et al.  Clinical predictors of the defibrillation threshold with the unipolar implantable defibrillation system. , 1995, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  P. Kudenchuk,et al.  A prospective randomized evaluation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator size on unipolar defibrillation system efficacy. , 1995, Circulation.

[12]  E. Gang,et al.  Optimal electrode configuration for pectoral transvenous implantable defibrillator without an active can. , 1995, The American journal of cardiology.

[13]  George A. Johnson,et al.  Serial Defibrillation Threshold Measures in Man: A Prospective Controlled Study , 1995, Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology.

[14]  M. Gold,et al.  Effects of an active pectoral-pulse generator shell on defibrillation efficacy with a transvenous lead system. , 1996, The American journal of cardiology.

[15]  D. Packer,et al.  Consistent subcutaneous prepectoral implantation of a new implantable cardioverter defibrillator. , 1994, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[16]  D. Zipes,et al.  Results of the international study of the implantable pacemaker cardioverter-defibrillator. A comparison of epicardial and endocardial lead systems. The Pacemaker-Cardioverter-Defibrillator Investigators. , 1995, Circulation.

[17]  A. Natale,et al.  Effects of Initial Polarity on Defibrillation Threshold with Biphasic Pulses , 1995, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[18]  M. Gold,et al.  Transvenous Defibrillation Lead Systems , 1996, Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology.

[19]  M. Niebauer,et al.  Effect of first-phase polarity of biphasic shocks on defibrillation threshold with a single transvenous lead system. , 1995, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[20]  R. Peters,et al.  Complications associated with pectoral cardioverter-defibrillator implantation: comparison of subcutaneous and submuscular approaches. Worldwide Jewel Investigators. , 1996, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[21]  D. L. Derfus,et al.  Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Lead Technology: Improved Performance and Lower Defibrillation Thresholds , 1995, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[22]  B B Lerman,et al.  Current-based versus energy-based ventricular defibrillation: a prospective study. , 1988, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[23]  G. Breithardt,et al.  A Prospective Randomized Cross‐Over Comparison of Mono‐ and Biphasic Defibrillation Using Nonthoracotomy Lead Configurations in Humans , 1994, Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology.

[24]  S. Saksena Defibrillation thresholds and perioperative mortality associated with endocardial and epicardial defibrillation lead systems. The PCD investigators and participating institutions. , 1993, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[25]  S. Adler,et al.  Optimal electrode position for transvenous defibrillation: a prospective randomized study. , 1996, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[26]  George A. Johnson,et al.  Prospective Randomized Comparison of Biphasic Waveform Tilt Using a Unipolar Defibrillation System , 1995, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[27]  George A. Johnson,et al.  Electrode System Influence on Biphasic Waveform Defibrillation Efficacy in Humans , 1991, Circulation.

[28]  F. Venditti,et al.  Rise in chronic defibrillation thresholds in nonthoracotomy implantable defibrillator. , 1994, Circulation.

[29]  George A. Johnson,et al.  A Simplified, Single‐Lead Unipolar Transvenous Cardioversion‐Defibrillation System , 1993, Circulation.