[Is intraoperative ICD-testing still necessary?].

Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol

Klinik für Kardiologie, Angiologie und Internistische Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, 66421, Homburg/Saar, Deutschland.

Published: June 2010

AI Article Synopsis

Article Abstract

Intraoperative ICD-testing is traditionally performed in many hospitals in order to ensure reliable sensing, detection, and defibrillation of induced ventricular fibrillation. The technical progress of defibrillators allows rapid detection and delivery of high energy shocks which defibrillates effectively in the vast majority all patients at implant. This review describes arguments pro and contra of systematic testing of the defibrillation threshold in all patients. Many reasons argue against testing in all patients: experimental considerations, patients' specific and nonspecific factors, e.g., underlying severity of cardiac disease, ischemia, and medication, as well as factors specific to the ICD system, e.g., implanted type and location of electrodes and active cans. Finally, the testing method is very important, since it bears the risk of false negative test results because the a priori probability of a positive test result is >95%. Therefore, data from prospective randomized studies are necessary in order to abandon the tradition of ICD-testing on an evidence-based background.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00399-010-0080-3DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

intraoperative icd-testing
8
[is intraoperative
4
icd-testing necessary?]
4
necessary?] intraoperative
4
icd-testing traditionally
4
traditionally performed
4
performed hospitals
4
hospitals order
4
order ensure
4
ensure reliable
4

Similar Publications

Background: Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is an electrical-device therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% also have indication for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), and in some cases subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is selected.

Hypothesis: CCM and S-ICD can be combined to work efficaciously and safely.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: The placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has become routine practice to protect high risk patients from sudden cardiac death. However, implantation-related myocardial micro-damage and its relation to different implantation strategies are poorly characterized.

Methods: A total of 194 ICD recipients (64±12 years, 83% male, 95% primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, 35% cardiac resynchronization therapy) were randomly assigned to one of three implantation strategies: (1) ICD implantation without any defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing, (2) estimation of the DFT without arrhythmia induction (modified "upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) testing") or (3) traditional safety margin testing including ventricular arrhythmia induction.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is an implantable device for antiarrhythmic therapy with no intravascular leads.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe the technical feasibility of combining the S-ICD with other cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers with transvenous or epicardial electrodes. We also provide the first experience of combining an S-ICD with catheter-based therapies, including cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) and vagus nerve stimulation.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Implantation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) from the left pectoral region is the standard therapeutical method. Increasing numbers of system revisions due to lead dysfunction and infections will consecutively increase the numbers of right-sided implantations. The reliability of devices implanted on the right pectoral side remains controversially discussed, and the question of testing these devices remains unanswered.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objectives: Implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with a high risk for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias is a standard therapy. The development of new ICD leads, shock algorithms, high-energy defibrillators and rapid energy supply has improved the devices. Nevertheless, the discussion regarding 'shock or no shock' to test the system intraoperatively has not silenced yet.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!