Literature DB >> 15680721

Current of injury predicts adequate active lead fixation in permanent pacemaker/defibrillation leads.

Sherry J Saxonhouse1, Jamie B Conti, Anne B Curtis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether current of injury can guide adequate placement of active-fixation pacing leads.
BACKGROUND: Active-fixation leads cause injury to the myocardium at the time of fixation, manifested as a current of injury (COI) that may result in acute elevation of pacing thresholds. The relationship of COI to subsequent improvement in pacing thresholds is not clear.
METHODS: Sixty-five patients undergoing active-fixation lead implantation were enrolled. Current of injury was characterized as the duration of the intracardiac electrogram (EGM) and the magnitude of ST-segment elevation. Pacing parameters were measured up to 10 min after fixation.
RESULTS: A total of 96 active-fixation leads were studied, and 76 leads had a current of injury. From baseline to the time of fixation, the duration of the intracardiac EGM in ventricular leads increased from 150 +/- 31 ms to 200 +/- 25 ms (p < 0.001), and the ST-segment increased from 1.5 +/- 0.2 mV to 10.0 +/- 2.0 mV (p < 0.001), with subsequent improvement in pacing thresholds from 1.5 +/- 0.4 V to 0.8 +/- 0.3 V (p < 0.001) at 10 min. Atrial leads with a current of injury had similar findings. Of the 20 leads without a COI, 5 dislodged acutely and 15 had high pacing thresholds at 10 min, requiring repositioning.
CONCLUSIONS: The development of a COI indicates that within 10 min of fixation, pacing threshold will return to an acceptable range even if the initial measurement is high. Conversely, without a COI, lead fixation is not adequate and the lead should be repositioned.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15680721     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.10.045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  14 in total

1.  The femoral route revisited: an alternative for pectoral pacing lead implantation.

Authors:  F A Bracke; I Ozdemir; B van Gelder
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.380

2.  The frequency and incremental cost of major complications among medicare beneficiaries receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Authors:  Matthew R Reynolds; David J Cohen; Aaron D Kugelmass; Phillip P Brown; Edmund R Becker; Steven D Culler; April W Simon
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2006-05-30       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Appropriate and inappropriate electrical therapies delivered by an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: effect on intracardiac electrogram.

Authors:  Peter Stempniewicz; Alan Cheng; Allison Connolly; Xin Yuan Wang; Hugh Calkins; Gordon F Tomaselli; Ronald D Berger; Larisa G Tereshchenko
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2010-11-18

4.  HRS policy statement: clinical cardiac electrophysiology fellowship curriculum: update 2011.

Authors:  Mark S Link; Derek V Exner; Mark Anderson; Michael Ackerman; Amin Al-Ahmad; Bradley P Knight; Steven M Markowitz; Elizabeth S Kaufman; David Haines; Samuel J Asirvatham; David J Callans; J Paul Mounsey; Frank Bogun; Sanjiv M Narayan; Andrew D Krahn; Suneet Mittal; Jagmeet Singh; John D Fisher; Sumeet S Chugh
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 6.343

5.  Intracardiac J-point elevation before the onset of polymorphic ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation in patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

Authors:  Larisa G Tereshchenko; Aaron McCabe; Lichy Han; Sanjoli Sur; Timothy Huang; Joseph E Marine; Alan Cheng; David D Spragg; Sunil Sinha; Hugh Calkins; Kenneth Stein; Gordon F Tomaselli; Ronald D Berger
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 6.343

6.  Transient local injury current in right ventricular electrogram after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shock predicts heart failure progression.

Authors:  Larisa G Tereshchenko; Mitchell N Faddis; Barry J Fetics; Karl E Zelik; Igor R Efimov; Ronald D Berger
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Biophysical parameters during radiofrequency catheter ablation of scar-mediated ventricular tachycardia: epicardial and endocardial applications via manual and magnetic navigation.

Authors:  Tara Bourke; Eric Buch; Nilesh Mathuria; Yoav Michowitz; Ricky Yu; Ravi Mandapati; Kalyanam Shivkumar; Roderick Tung
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2014-07-24

8.  Combining current of injury and P-wave sensing optimized right atrial active-fixation leads implantation.

Authors:  Meng-Rong Chen; Fei-Long Zhang; Wei-Wei Wang; Xue-Hai Chen; Jian-Hua Chen; Liang-Long Chen
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Morphology of current of injury does not predict long term active fixation ICD lead performance.

Authors:  Hanno Oswald; Benjamin Husemann; Ajmal Gardiwal; Christoph Lissel; Maximilian A Pichlmaier; Ulrich Luesebrink; Thorben Koenig; Gunnar Klein
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2009-03-15

10.  Time course of current of injury is related to acute stability of active-fixation pacing leads in rabbits.

Authors:  Shalaimaiti Shali; Alimujiang Wushou; Entao Liu; Lin Jia; Ruiming Yao; Yangang Su; Junbo Ge
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.