INTRODUCTION: A purely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) requires higher energy but may be an effective alternative to transvenous ICDs to deliver lifesaving therapies. OBJECTIVE: To identify combinations of anteroposterior subcutaneous shock pathways and waveforms with defibrillation efficacy comparable to transvenous ICDs. METHODS: Defibrillation testing was performed in 141 patients temporarily implanted with an active can emulator and subcutaneous coil electrodes. The patients were subdivided into 5 groups within 2 study phases. In all groups, a posterior electrode was positioned with its tip close to the spine. In the first study phase, 2 different can locations were evaluated: (1) an inframammary pocket (IM-1-750), or (2) a conventional infraclavicular pocket (IC-1-750). In both cases, a 70 J biphasic shock was used (peak voltage 750 V; 270 μF capacitance). In the second phase, configuration IC-1-750 was enhanced by the addition of a second (parasternal) subcutaneous electrode (IC-2-750). Furthermore, the effects of a different 70 J shock waveform (1,000 V, 160 μF) were evaluated for configurations IM-1-750 and IC-2-750 (becoming IM-1-1000 and IC-2-1000). RESULTS: The proportion of patients satisfying a defibrillation safety margin test of 2 consecutive successes at ≤50 J was 74%, 11%, and 44%, respectively, for the IM-1-750, IC-1-750, and IC-2-750 configurations, and 93% and 86% for the IM-1-1000 and IC-2-1000 configurations. CONCLUSIONS: Defibrillation efficacy comparable to that of a transvenous system was achieved with an anteroposterior subcutaneous ICD configuration, with 160 μF capacitance, 1,000 V, and 70 J output. An infraclavicular pocket location becomes feasible if a parasternal subcutaneous coil is added.
INTRODUCTION: A purely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) requires higher energy but may be an effective alternative to transvenous ICDs to deliver lifesaving therapies. OBJECTIVE: To identify combinations of anteroposterior subcutaneous shock pathways and waveforms with defibrillation efficacy comparable to transvenous ICDs. METHODS: Defibrillation testing was performed in 141 patients temporarily implanted with an active can emulator and subcutaneous coil electrodes. The patients were subdivided into 5 groups within 2 study phases. In all groups, a posterior electrode was positioned with its tip close to the spine. In the first study phase, 2 different can locations were evaluated: (1) an inframammary pocket (IM-1-750), or (2) a conventional infraclavicular pocket (IC-1-750). In both cases, a 70 J biphasic shock was used (peak voltage 750 V; 270 μF capacitance). In the second phase, configuration IC-1-750 was enhanced by the addition of a second (parasternal) subcutaneous electrode (IC-2-750). Furthermore, the effects of a different 70 J shock waveform (1,000 V, 160 μF) were evaluated for configurations IM-1-750 and IC-2-750 (becoming IM-1-1000 and IC-2-1000). RESULTS: The proportion of patients satisfying a defibrillation safety margin test of 2 consecutive successes at ≤50 J was 74%, 11%, and 44%, respectively, for the IM-1-750, IC-1-750, and IC-2-750 configurations, and 93% and 86% for the IM-1-1000 and IC-2-1000 configurations. CONCLUSIONS: Defibrillation efficacy comparable to that of a transvenous system was achieved with an anteroposterior subcutaneous ICD configuration, with 160 μF capacitance, 1,000 V, and 70 J output. An infraclavicular pocket location becomes feasible if a parasternal subcutaneous coil is added.