OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to develop a low-energy electrotherapy that terminates ventricular tachycardia (VT) when antitachycardia pacing (ATP) fails. BACKGROUND: High-energy implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks are associated with device failure, significant morbidity, and increased mortality. A low-energy alternative to ICD shocks is desirable. METHODS: Myocardial infarction was created in 25 dogs. Sustained, monomorphic VT was induced by programmed stimulation. Defibrillation electrodes were placed in the right ventricular apex, and coronary sinus and left ventricular epicardium. If ATP failed to terminate sustained VT, the defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) of standard versus experimental electrotherapies were measured. RESULTS: Sustained VT ranged from 276 to 438 beats/min (mean 339 beats/min). The right ventricular-coronary sinus shock vector had lower impedance than the right ventricular-left ventricular patch (54.4 ± 18.1 Ω versus 109.8 ± 16.9 Ω; p < 0.001). A single shock required between 0.3 ± 0.2 J to 5.9 ± 2.5 J (mean 2.64 ± 3.22 J; p = 0.008) to terminate VT, and varied depending upon the phase of the VT cycle in which it was delivered. By contrast, multiple shocks delivered within 1 VT cycle length were not phase dependent and achieved lower DFT compared with a single shock (0.13 ± 0.09 J for 3 shocks, 0.08 ± 0.04 J for 5 shocks, and 0.09 ± 0.07 J for 7 shocks; p < 0.001). Finally, a multistage electrotherapy (MSE) achieved significantly lower DFT compared with a single biphasic shock (0.03 ± 0.05 J versus 2.37 ± 1.20 J; respectively, p < 0.001). At a peak shock amplitude of 20 V, MSE achieved 91.3% of terminations versus 10.5% for a biphasic shock (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MSE achieved a major reduction in DFT compared with a single biphasic shock for ATP-refractory monomorphic VT, and represents a novel electrotherapy to reduce high-energy ICD shocks.
OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to develop a low-energy electrotherapy that terminates ventricular tachycardia (VT) when antitachycardia pacing (ATP) fails. BACKGROUND: High-energy implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks are associated with device failure, significant morbidity, and increased mortality. A low-energy alternative to ICD shocks is desirable. METHODS:Myocardial infarction was created in 25 dogs. Sustained, monomorphic VT was induced by programmed stimulation. Defibrillation electrodes were placed in the right ventricular apex, and coronary sinus and left ventricular epicardium. If ATP failed to terminate sustained VT, the defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) of standard versus experimental electrotherapies were measured. RESULTS: Sustained VT ranged from 276 to 438 beats/min (mean 339 beats/min). The right ventricular-coronary sinus shock vector had lower impedance than the right ventricular-left ventricular patch (54.4 ± 18.1 Ω versus 109.8 ± 16.9 Ω; p < 0.001). A single shock required between 0.3 ± 0.2 J to 5.9 ± 2.5 J (mean 2.64 ± 3.22 J; p = 0.008) to terminate VT, and varied depending upon the phase of the VT cycle in which it was delivered. By contrast, multiple shocks delivered within 1 VT cycle length were not phase dependent and achieved lower DFT compared with a single shock (0.13 ± 0.09 J for 3 shocks, 0.08 ± 0.04 J for 5 shocks, and 0.09 ± 0.07 J for 7 shocks; p < 0.001). Finally, a multistage electrotherapy (MSE) achieved significantly lower DFT compared with a single biphasic shock (0.03 ± 0.05 J versus 2.37 ± 1.20 J; respectively, p < 0.001). At a peak shock amplitude of 20 V, MSE achieved 91.3% of terminations versus 10.5% for a biphasic shock (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MSE achieved a major reduction in DFT compared with a single biphasic shock for ATP-refractory monomorphic VT, and represents a novel electrotherapy to reduce high-energy ICD shocks.
Authors: Eleanor B Schron; Derek V Exner; Qing Yao; Louise S Jenkins; Jonathan S Steinberg; James R Cook; Steven P Kutalek; Peter L Friedman; Rosemary S Bubien; Richard L Page; Judy Powell Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-02-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: M S Wathen; M O Sweeney; P J DeGroot; A J Stark; J L Koehler; M B Chisner; C Machado; W O Adkisson Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-08-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mark S Wathen; Paul J DeGroot; Michael O Sweeney; Alice J Stark; Mary F Otterness; Wayne O Adkisson; Robert C Canby; Koroush Khalighi; Christian Machado; Donald S Rubenstein; Kent J Volosin Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-10-18 Impact factor: 29.690
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
Authors: Lizhi Xu; Sarah R Gutbrod; Yinji Ma; Artin Petrossians; Yuhao Liu; R Chad Webb; Jonathan A Fan; Zijian Yang; Renxiao Xu; John J Whalen; James D Weiland; Yonggang Huang; Igor R Efimov; John A Rogers Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: J Christoph; M Chebbok; C Richter; J Schröder-Schetelig; P Bittihn; S Stein; I Uzelac; F H Fenton; G Hasenfuß; R F Gilmour; S Luther Journal: Nature Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Ajit H Janardhan; Sarah R Gutbrod; Wenwen Li; Di Lang; Richard B Schuessler; Igor R Efimov Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Adam Connolly; Steven Williams; Kawal Rhode; Christopher A Rinaldi; Martin J Bishop Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Fu Siong Ng; Ondřej Toman; Jan Petru; Petr Peichl; Roger A Winkle; Vivek Y Reddy; Petr Neuzil; R Hardwin Mead; Norman A Qureshi; Zachary I Whinnett; David W Bourn; M Brent Shelton; Josef Kautzner; Arjun D Sharma; Meleze Hocini; Michel Haïssaguerre; Nicholas S Peters; Igor R Efimov Journal: JACC Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2021-03-31