INTRODUCTION: In patients with non-thoracotomy defibrillation lead (NTL) systems coupled with monophasic shock waveforms, the defibrillation threshold (DFT) rises early after implantation. There is little information regarding features predictive of the DFT rise, or DFT changes early after implantation of NTL systems coupled with biphasic shock waveforms. METHODS AND RESULTS: DFT measurements were performed serially at implantation, prior to hospital discharge (mean 4 +/- 3 days), and at follow-up (mean 49 +/- 22 days) in 146 patients with an NTL system. Factors were assessed for association with a "clinically important" early postimplantation DFT rise, defined as a rise of > or = 2 energy steps (2 to 4 J per step; > or = 5 J total). A clinically important early postimplantation DFT rise occurred in 48 patients (33%). Univariate predictors of the rise included the monophasic shock waveform, the Medtronic Transvene lead system, the presence of a subcutaneous defibrillation patch, and the number of shocks delivered during the implantation procedure. However, the only independent predictor of a clinically important DFT rise was the monophasic shock waveform (F = 18, P < 0.001). For the monophasic patient group (n = 79), the incidence of a DFT rise was 53% (n = 42). For the biphasic patient group (n = 67), the incidence of a DFT rise was 9% (n = 6). The clinical characteristics of the monophasic and biphasic groups were not significantly different, nor were their DFTs at implantation. Among a subgroup of 18 consecutive patients who underwent serial DFT testing utilizing both monophasic and biphasic waveforms, the incidence of a clinically important DFT rise with monophasic (n = 9,50%) was higher than with biphasic shocks (n = 3,17%; P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: NTL systems coupled with biphasic shock waveforms have an attenuated incidence of a clinically important DFT rise early after implantation, relative to patients with NTL systems coupled to monophasic waveforms.
INTRODUCTION: In patients with non-thoracotomy defibrillation lead (NTL) systems coupled with monophasic shock waveforms, the defibrillation threshold (DFT) rises early after implantation. There is little information regarding features predictive of the DFT rise, or DFT changes early after implantation of NTL systems coupled with biphasic shock waveforms. METHODS AND RESULTS: DFT measurements were performed serially at implantation, prior to hospital discharge (mean 4 +/- 3 days), and at follow-up (mean 49 +/- 22 days) in 146 patients with an NTL system. Factors were assessed for association with a "clinically important" early postimplantation DFT rise, defined as a rise of > or = 2 energy steps (2 to 4 J per step; > or = 5 J total). A clinically important early postimplantation DFT rise occurred in 48 patients (33%). Univariate predictors of the rise included the monophasic shock waveform, the Medtronic Transvene lead system, the presence of a subcutaneous defibrillation patch, and the number of shocks delivered during the implantation procedure. However, the only independent predictor of a clinically important DFT rise was the monophasic shock waveform (F = 18, P < 0.001). For the monophasic patient group (n = 79), the incidence of a DFT rise was 53% (n = 42). For the biphasic patient group (n = 67), the incidence of a DFT rise was 9% (n = 6). The clinical characteristics of the monophasic and biphasic groups were not significantly different, nor were their DFTs at implantation. Among a subgroup of 18 consecutive patients who underwent serial DFT testing utilizing both monophasic and biphasic waveforms, the incidence of a clinically important DFT rise with monophasic (n = 9,50%) was higher than with biphasic shocks (n = 3,17%; P = 0.05). CONCLUSION:NTL systems coupled with biphasic shock waveforms have an attenuated incidence of a clinically important DFT rise early after implantation, relative to patients with NTL systems coupled to monophasic waveforms.
Authors: D Iskos; K Lock; K G Lurie; G J Fahy; S Petersen-Stejskal; D G Benditt Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: D Y Yazmajian; D Schwartzman; D J Callans; C D Gottieb; F E Marchlinski Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 1997-09 Impact factor: 1.900