Incidence and predictors of pacemaker dysfunction with unipolar ventricular lead configuration. Can we identify patients who benefit from bipolar electrodes?

PACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

Volumn 24, Issue 9 I, 2001, Pages 1383-1388

  Wiegand, Uwe K H ^a   Bode, Frank ^a   Bonnemeier, Hendrik ^a   Tölg, Ralph ^a   Peters, Werner ^a   Katus, Hugo A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LÜBECK   (Germany)

Author keywords

Bipolar configuration; Risk stratification; Unipolar configuration; Ventricular pacemaker dysfunction

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL HEART PACEMAKER; DEVICE; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; FEMALE; HEART OUTPUT; HEART VENTRICLE TACHYCARDIA; HUMAN; IMPLANTATION; INCIDENCE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PACEMAKER ELECTRODE; PREDICTION; RECIPIENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SYNCOPE; VAGUS NERVE STIMULATION;

EID: 0034835765     PISSN: 01478389     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1460-9592.2001.01383.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Unipolar versus bipolar pacing - Poles apart
2. Should unipolar pacemaker leads be banned? Lessons from pacemaker/implantable cardioverter defibrillator interactions
3. Should unipolar pacemaker leads be banned?
4. Long-term comparison of unipolar and bipolar pacing and sensing, using a new multiprogrammable pacemaker system
5. The clinical incidence and significance of myopotential sensing with unipolar pacemakers
6. Inhibition of demand pacemakers by myopotentials
7. Comparison of myopotential interference in unipolar-bipolar programmable DDD pacemakers
8. The influence of elevated 50 Hz electric and magnetic fields on implanted cardiac pacemakers: The role of the lead configuration and programming of the sensitivity
9. The response of implanted dual chamber pacemakers to 50 Hz extraneous electrical interference
10. The clinical relevance of electromyopotential oversensing in current unipolar devices
11. Durability of bipolar coaxial endocardial pacemaker leads compared with unipolar leads
12. Appraisal of pacing lead performance from the Danish Pacemaker Register
13. Electrophysiological characteristics of bipolar membrane carbon leads with and without steroid elution compared with a conventional carbon and a steroid-eluting platinum lead
14. Electrophysiological performance of a bipolar membrane-coated titanium nitride electrode: A randomized comparison of steroid and nonsteroid lead designs
15. Long-term assessment of unipolar and bipolar stimulation and sensing thresholds using a lead configuration programmable pacemaker
16. Uni- and bipolar 2-chamber stimulation with a DDD system of programmable polarity
17. Should unipolar leads be implanted in the atrium? A Holter electrocardiographic comparison of threshold adapted unipolar and high sensitive bipolar sensing
18. Unipolar sensing abnormalities: Incidence and clinical significance of skeletal muscle interference and undersensing in 228 patients
19. Unipolar sensing in contemporary pacemakers: Using myopotential testing to define optimal sensitivity settings
20. Inverse relation between patient age and chronic stimulation threshold in permanent endocardial ventricular pacing
21. Effect of the antiarrhythmic agent flecainide acetate on acute and chronic pacing thresholds
22. Myocardial stimulation threshold in patients with cardiac pacemakers: Effect of physiologic variables, pharmacologic agents, and lead electrodes
23. Effects of oral propafenone therapy on chronic myocardial pacing threshold
24. Effects of antiarrhythmic drugs on the chronic pacing threshold and the endocardial R wave amplitude in the conscious dog
25. Clinical experience with steroid-eluting unipolar electrodes
26. Assessment of long-term stability of chronic ventricular pacing thresholds in steroid-eluting electrodes
27. Effects of local steroid elution on chronic pacing threshold and impedance of endocardial pacemaker leads
28. Steroid-eluting electrodes prevent chronic pacing threshold rise in the atrial chamber after oral propafenone administration
29. Chronic ventricular electrograms: Do steroid-eluting leads differ from conventional leads?