Literature DB >> 11980683

Efficacy and temporal stability of reduced safety margins for ventricular defibrillation: primary results from the Low Energy Safety Study (LESS).

Michael R Gold1, Steven Higgins, Richard Klein, F Roosevelt Gilliam, Harry Kopelman, Scott Hessen, John Payne, S Adam Strickberger, David Breiter, Stephen Hahn.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, a safety margin of at least 10 J between the maximum output of the pulse generator and the energy needed for ventricular defibrillation has been used because lower safety margins were associated with unacceptably high rates of failed defibrillation and sudden cardiac death. The Low Energy Safety Study (LESS) was a prospective, randomized assessment of the safety margin requirements for modern implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) systems. METHODS AND
RESULTS: A total of 636 patients undergoing initial ICD implantation with a dual-coil lead and active pulse generator were evaluated. The defibrillation threshold (DFT) and enhanced DFT (DFT+ and DFT++) were measured using a modified step-down protocol. Conversion testing of induced ventricular fibrillation before discharge, at 3 months, and at 12 months was performed, as was randomization to chronic programming at either 2 steps above DFT++ or maximal output. The induced ventricular fibrillation data had conversion success rates of 91.4%, 97.9%, 99.1%, 99.6%, and 99.8% for safety margins of 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 steps above the DFT++, respectively. A margin of 4 to 6 J was adequate to maintain high conversion success over time (98.9% before discharge versus 99.2% at 12 months; P=NS). Over a mean follow-up of 24+/-13 months, conversion of spontaneously occurring ventricular tachyarrhythmias >200 bpm was identical (97.3%), despite a safety margin difference of 5.2+/-1.1 J for the 2-step group versus 20.8+/-4.2 J for maximal output.
CONCLUSIONS: With a rigorous implantation algorithm, a safety margin of about 5 J is adequate for safe implantation of modern ICD systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11980683     DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.0000015508.59749.f5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  18 in total

Review 1.  Dual- versus single-coil implantable defibrillator leads: review of the literature.

Authors:  Jörg Neuzner; Jörg Carlsson
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 5.460

2.  [Is intraoperative ICD-testing still necessary?].

Authors:  C Mewis; H-R Neuberger; A Buob
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2010-06

3.  An observational registry on efficacy and safety of the right ventricular outflow tract as a site for ICD leads: results of the EFFORT (EFFicacy Of Right ventricular outflow Tract as site for ICD leads) registry.

Authors:  Giosuè Mascioli; Gianpaolo Gelmini; Albino Reggiani; Vittorio Giudici; Alfredo Spotti; Alessandro Mocini; Renato Marconi; Franco Ruffa; Gabriele Zanotto
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2010-06-25       Impact factor: 1.900

4.  High-energy defibrillation increases the dispersion of regional ventricular repolarization.

Authors:  Yang Pang; Qi Jin; Ning Zhang; Shujing Ren; Tianyou Ling; Ying Chen; Gang Gu; Yongchu Shen; Liqun Wu
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 5.  ICD programming.

Authors:  Mauro Biffi
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2013-12-20

6.  Evaluation of defibrillation safety margin in modern implantable cardioverter defibrillators after administration of amiodarone.

Authors:  Julia Köbe; Florian Reinke; Dirk G Dechering; Günter Breithardt; Lars Eckardt
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2011-11-05       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 7.  The Saga of Defibrillation Testing: When Less Is More.

Authors:  Marye J Gleva; Melissa Robinson; Jeanne Poole
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 2.931

8.  Incidence and clinical predictors of low defibrillation safety margin at time of implantable defibrillator implantation.

Authors:  Zhongwei Cheng; Mintu Turakhia; Ronald Lo; Anurag Gupta; Paul C Zei; Henry H Hsia; Amin Al-Ahmad; Paul J Wang
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 1.900

9.  Incidence of very high defibrillation thresholds (DFT) and efficacy of subcutaneous (SQ) array insertion during implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation.

Authors:  Atul Verma; Alexander J Kaplan; Bradley Sarak; Richard Oosthuizen; Marianne Beardsall; Jan Higgenbottam; Zaev Wulffhart; Yaariv Khaykin
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2010-09-24       Impact factor: 1.900

10.  How to Manage a High Defibrillation Threshold in ICD Patients: and Does it Really Matter?

Authors:  Maria Vittoria Matassini; Jeff S Healey
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2013-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.