BACKGROUND: Nonpulsatile left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly used for treatment of refractory heart failure. A majority of such patients have implanted cardiac devices, namely implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) or cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker (CRT-P) or cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) devices. However, potential interactions between LVADs and cardiac devices in this category of patients remain unknown. METHODS: We reviewed case records and device logs of 15 patients with ICDs or CRT-P or CRT-D devices who subsequently had implantation of a VentrAssist LVAD (Ventracor Ltd., Chatswood, Australia) as destination therapy or bridge to heart transplantation. Pacemaker and ICD lead parameters before and after LVAD implant were compared. In addition, ventricular tachyarrhythmia event logs and potential electromagnetic interference reports were evaluated. RESULTS: Right ventricular (RV) sensing decreased in the first 6 months post-LVAD. Mean R-wave amplitude preimplant was 10.9 +/- 5.25 mV compared with 7.2 +/- 3.4 mV during follow-up (P = 0.02). RV impedance also decreased from 642 +/- 240 ohms at baseline to 580 +/- 212 ohms at follow-up (P = 0.007). There was a significant increase in RV stimulation threshold following implantation of the LVAD from 0.8 +/- 0.6 V at baseline to 1.4 +/- 1.0 V in the first 6 months postimplant (P = 0.01). A marked increase in ventricular tachyarrhythmia burden was observed in three patients. One patient displayed electromagnetic interference between the LVAD and defibrillator, resulting in inappropriate defibrillation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: LVADs have a definite impact on cardiac devices in respect with alteration of lead parameters, ventricular tachyarrhythmias, and electromagnetic interference.
BACKGROUND: Nonpulsatile left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly used for treatment of refractory heart failure. A majority of such patients have implanted cardiac devices, namely implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) or cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker (CRT-P) or cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) devices. However, potential interactions between LVADs and cardiac devices in this category of patients remain unknown. METHODS: We reviewed case records and device logs of 15 patients with ICDs or CRT-P or CRT-D devices who subsequently had implantation of a VentrAssist LVAD (Ventracor Ltd., Chatswood, Australia) as destination therapy or bridge to heart transplantation. Pacemaker and ICD lead parameters before and after LVAD implant were compared. In addition, ventricular tachyarrhythmia event logs and potential electromagnetic interference reports were evaluated. RESULTS: Right ventricular (RV) sensing decreased in the first 6 months post-LVAD. Mean R-wave amplitude preimplant was 10.9 +/- 5.25 mV compared with 7.2 +/- 3.4 mV during follow-up (P = 0.02). RV impedance also decreased from 642 +/- 240 ohms at baseline to 580 +/- 212 ohms at follow-up (P = 0.007). There was a significant increase in RV stimulation threshold following implantation of the LVAD from 0.8 +/- 0.6 V at baseline to 1.4 +/- 1.0 V in the first 6 months postimplant (P = 0.01). A marked increase in ventricular tachyarrhythmia burden was observed in three patients. One patient displayed electromagnetic interference between the LVAD and defibrillator, resulting in inappropriate defibrillation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: LVADs have a definite impact on cardiac devices in respect with alteration of lead parameters, ventricular tachyarrhythmias, and electromagnetic interference.
Authors: Marwan M Refaat; Toshikazu Tanaka; Robert L Kormos; Dennis McNamara; Jeffrey Teuteberg; Steve Winowich; Barry London; Marc A Simon Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2011-12-22 Impact factor: 5.712
Authors: Rachel M Kaplan; Jeremiah Wasserlauf; Rachel H Bandi; Elizabeth M Lange; Bradley P Knight; Susan S Kim Journal: HeartRhythm Case Rep Date: 2018-03-26