Search

ICD Programming for Shock Reduction Background Shock therapy delivery by implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) can be painful and may have adverse consequences. Reducing shock burden for patients with ICDs would be beneficial. Methods PROVIDE was a prospective, randomized study of primary prevention ICD patients. Patients in the experimental group received a combination of programmed parameters with higher detection rates, longer detection intervals, empiric antitachycardia pacing (ATP), and optimized supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) discriminators, while those in the control group were programmed with conventional parameters. Shock therapy and arrhythmic syncope were compared. Results Of 1,670 patients enrolled (846 in the experimental group, 824 in the control group) and monitored over a follow-up of 530 ± 241 days, 202 patients received shock therapy for any cause (82 in the experimental group and 120 in the control group). The median time to first shock was significantly prolonged (13.1 vs 7.8 months, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47 to 0.82, P = 0.0005) and the 2-year shock rate significantly reduced (12.4% vs 19.4%, P < 0.001) in the experimental group compared to the control group. There was no increase in arrhythmic syncope (HR: 1.64, 95% CI: 0.69 to 3.90, P = 0.26), while the overall mortality was reduced (HR: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.98, P = 0.036) in the experimental group compared to the control group. Conclusion A combination of programmed parameters utilizing higher detection rate, longer detection intervals, empiric ATP, and optimized SVT discriminators reduced ICD therapies without increasing arrhythmic syncope and was associated with reduction in all-cause mortality among ICD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The PROVE trial was designed to determine if antitachycardia pacing (ATP) is clinically beneficial for primary prevention in patients who have implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds). Background: Use of ICDs and CRT-Ds reduces mortality in patients with ventricular dysfunction and mild to moderate heart failure. However, in studies of the primary prevention population, shock-only ICDs are predominantly used, without ATP programming for less painful termination of ventricular tachycardia (VT). Methods: We conducted a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter study using market-released ICDs and CRT-Ds. Patients received devices programmed to deliver ATP for VT cycle lengths of 270-330 ms. Follow-up evaluation was performed at 3, 6, and 12 months. The incidence of VT and the rate of successful termination by ATP were analyzed. Results: Of 830 patients in the study population (men, 73%; mean age, 67.3 ± 12 years), 32% received single-chamber ICDs, 44% dual-chamber ICDs, and 24% CRT-Ds. ATP was attempted for 112 VT episodes in 71 patients, and 103 (92%) of the VT episodes were successfully terminated. Three VT episodes were accelerated by ATP and required termination by ICD shock; 6 episodes terminated spontaneously or by ICD shock. Conclusions: VT is common in patients without a history of this arrhythmia who have received ICDs or CRT-Ds for primary prevention indications. Programming ICDs for ATP therapy at the time of implantation could potentially terminate most VT episodes and reduce the number of painful shocks for these patients. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 21, pp. 1349-1354, December 2010) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Assessment of ventricular activation pattern is critical to the successful ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT). We have previously shown that the global atrial activation pattern during tachycardia can be rapidly and accurately assessed by calculating the postpacing interval variability (PPIV); PPIV was minimal in circuitous tachycardias and highly variable in centrifugal tachycardias. In the present study, we use the PPIV to determine the ventricular global activation pattern during VT. Methods: Patients with mappable VT were included. We defined global ventricular activation as either centrifugal (arising from a focus with radial expansion) or circuitous (gross macro-reentrant circuit), based on the findings of electroanatomic mapping. PPIV was calculated as the difference in postpacing interval with right ventricular apical overdrive pacing during tachycardia at cycle lengths (CL) 10 ms and 30-ms shorter than tachycardia, regardless of the origin of the tachycardia. We studied 20 patients with 23 VTs (11 centrifugal, mean CL 390 ± 36.1 ms; 12 circuitous, mean CL 418 ± 75.7 ms). Results: The mean PPIV was 45 ± 16 ms for patients with centrifugal VT and 6.7 ± 4.1 ms for patients with circuitous VT. Rank sum analysis of PPIV showed a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Our data suggest that the global ventricular activation pattern during VT can be rapidly and accurately defined by assessing the PPIV. This technique allows for a rapid confirmation of the tachycardia activation and significantly facilitates mapping and ablation. (PACE 2010; 33:129–134) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Knowledge of the global atrial activation pattern is critical to ablation of an atrial arrhythmia. We hypothesized that the variability in post-pacing intervals (PPIs) with pacing at different cycle lengths (CLs) from the same pacing site, regardless of distance to the circuit, can be used to identify atrial activation patterns during tachycardia. Methods and Results: Consecutive patients referred for ablation of organized atrial arrhythmias were included (n = 28, 31 total tachycardias). The variability in PPIs (PPIV) was calculated by comparing the difference in PPIs after overdrive pacing with 5-second trains 10, 20, and 30 ms shorter than the tachycardia cycle length (TCL). The global activation pattern was defined as circuitous (macroreentrant atrial circuit) or centrifugal (focal origin with centrifugal radiation) by electroanatomic mapping. Except for one case, all pacing was performed from the proximal coronary sinus bipole. Circuitous tachycardias (n = 17, all macro-reentrant) exhibited minimal variability with pacing at 10 ms and 30 ms shorter than TCL (6.0 ± 2.5 ms), whereas centrifugal tachycardias (n = 14, 8 microreentrant) displayed a high degree of variability (56.5 ± 20.6 ms). Rank sum analysis of PPIV suggests that the two groups are indeed distinct (P < 0.001). Using PPIV cutoffs of ≤10 ms and ≥30 ms, circuitous and centrifugal activation patterns could be distinguished with a high degree of sensitivity (94% circuitous, 92.8% centrifugal) and 100% specificity. Conclusions: Our data support the use of PPIV to rapidly and accurately predict the global activation pattern during atrial arrhythmia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]