Intraoperative comparison of a subthreshold test pulse with the standard high-energy shock approach for the measurement of defibrillation lead impedance

Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 56-59

  Schuchert, Andreas ^a   Winter, Joachim ^b   Binner, Ludwig ^c   Kühl, Martin ^d   Meinertz, Thomas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

^b HEINRICH HEINE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ULM   (Germany)

^d Guidant Corporation   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Defibrillation lead impedance; Defibrillation test; Dual coil defibrillation lead; Implantable cardioverter defibrillator; Single coil defibrillation lead

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; DEFIBRILLATION; DEFIBRILLATOR; DEVICE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEART VENTRICLE TACHYCARDIA; HUMAN; IMPEDANCE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT; PATIENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECORDING; SEDATION; SHOCK; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

DEFIBRILLATORS, IMPLANTABLE; ELECTRIC COUNTERSHOCK; ELECTRIC IMPEDANCE; ELECTRODES; EQUIPMENT SAFETY; EUROPE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MONITORING, INTRAOPERATIVE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TACHYCARDIA, VENTRICULAR;

EID: 33645108248     PISSN: 10453873     EISSN: 15408167     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2005.00261.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bokhari F Newman D Greene M Korley V Mangat I Dorian P Long-term comparison of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator versus amiodarone: Eleven-year follow-up of a subset of patients in the Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study (CIDS) Circulation 2004 110 112 116
2. Greenberg H Case RB Moss AJ Brown MW Carroll ER Andrews ML MADIT-II Investigators: Analysis of mortality events in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT-II) J Am Coll Cardiol 2004 43 1459 1465
3. Wilkoff BL Kuhlkamp V Volosin K Ellenbogen K Waldecker B Kacet S Gillberg JM DeSouza CM Critical analysis of dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator arrhythmia detection: Results and technical considerations Circulation 2001 103 381 386
4. Sinha AM Stellbrink C Schuchert A Mox B Jordaens L Lamaison D Gill J Kaplan A Merkely B Phylax AV Investigator Group: Clinical experience with a new detection algorithm for differentiation of supraventricular from ventricular tachycardia in a dual-chamber defibrillator J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2004 15 646 652
5. Hauser RG Cannom D Hayes DL Parsonnet V Hayes J Ratliff N 3rd. Tyers GF Epstein AE Vlay SC Furman S Gross J Long-term structural failure of coaxial polyurethane implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2002 25 879 882
6. Dorwarth U Frey B Dugas M Matis T Fiek M Schmoeckel M Remp T Durchlaub I Gerth A Steinbeck G Hoffmann E Transvenous defibrillation leads: High incidence of failure during long-term follow-up J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003 14 38 43
7. Ellenbogen KA Wood MA Shepard RK Clemo HF Vaughn T Holloman K Dow M Leffler J Abeyratne A Verness D Detection and management of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead failure: Incidence and clinical implications J Am Coll Cardiol 2003 41 73 80
8. Mera F DeLurgio DB Langberg JJ Moss EA Leon AR Transvenous cardioverter defibrillator lead malfunction due to terminal connector damage in pectoral implants Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1999 22 1797 1801
9. Leitch JW Yee R Klein GJ Jones DL Utility of low energy test shocks for estimation of cardiac and electrode impedance with implantable defibrillators Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1990 13 410 416
10. Steinhaus DM Cardinal DS Mongeon L Musley SK Foley L Corrigan S Internal defibrillation: Pain perception of low energy shocks Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2002 25 1090 1093
11. Weiss DN Shorofsky SR Peters RW Gold MR The effect of delivered energy on defibrillation shock impedance J Interv Card Electrophysiol 1998 2 273 277
12. Vollmann D Luethje L Zenker D Domhof S Unterberg C Subthreshold test pulses versus low energy shock delivery to estimate high energy lead impedance in implanted cardioverter defibrillator patients Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2003 26 457 460
13. Iskos D Lock K Lurie KG Fahy GJ Petersen-Stejskal S Benditt DG Submuscular versus subcutaneous pectoral implantation of cardioverter- defibrillators: Effect on high voltage pathway impedance and defibrillation efficacy J Interv Card Electrophysiol 1998 2 47 52
14. Manolis AS Chiladakis J Maounis TN Vassilikos V Cokkinos DV Two-coil versus single-coil transvenous cardioverter defibrillator systems: Comparative data Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2000 23 1999 2002
15. Schulte B Sperzel J Carlsson J Schwarz T Ehrlich W Pitschner HF Neuzner J Dual-coil vs single-coil active pectoral implantable defibrillator lead systems: Defibrillation energy requirements and probability of defibrillation success at multiples of the defibrillation energy requirements Europace 2001 3 177 180
16. Gold MR Olsovsky MR Pelini MA Peters RW Shorofsky SR Comparison of single- and dual-coil active pectoral defibrillation lead systems J Am Coll Cardiol 1998 31 1391 1394
17. Stevens JM Buchwald AB Krieglstein H Early detection of lead fracture by painless high voltage lead impedance measurement in transvenous ICD lead systems J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2000 4 269 272
18. Schwartzman D Hull ML Callans DJ Gottlieb CD Marchlinski FE Serial defibrillation lead impedance in patients with epicardial and nonthoracotomy lead systems J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1996 7 697 703