Inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator discharges unrelated to supraventricular tachyarrhythmias
Open Access
- 17 August 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in EP Europace
- Vol. 8 (10), 863-869
- https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eul093
Abstract
Aims The development of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) with QRS morphology discrimination and dual-chamber sensing capabilities has improved the differentiation of supraventricular from ventricular tachycardias (VTs). Inappropriate ICD discharges may result from extracardiac signals caused by electromagnetic interference (EMI), because of electric fields and leakage currents from domestic or medical electrical devices, damaged sensing leads, and various cardiac and extracardiac signals that mimic VT and/or ventricular fibrillation. The aim of our study was to determine retrospectively the incidence and clinical relevance of these ICD behaviours and offer possible therapeutic solutions. Methods and results We have observed inappropriate discharges unrelated to supraventricular arrhythmias in 13 (3.9%) of the 336 patients implanted with ICDs in our centre from 1989 to 2005. Seven patients received inappropriate shocks following exposure to external EMI: improperly grounded electric stove, electrically powered watering system, hydro-massage bath, electrical pruner, electrocautery current during cardiac surgery, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation. In four patients, spurious discharges were related to internal noise of the ICD system from inappropriate lead connections. In two cases, erroneous antitachycardia therapy was delivered following different body signals oversensing (T-wave oversensing, wide QRS double-counting and myopotentials). In nine patients, non-invasive solutions prevented further inappropriate therapies (avoidance of EMI, malfunctioning atrial lead exclusion, ventricular sensing reprogramming). In four patients, surgical revision of the system was required (lead connections or position revision). Conclusion In our experience, inappropriate ICD discharges unrelated to supraventricular arrhythmias occurred in about 4% of ICD patients. A careful evaluation of clinical data and telemetric information (lead impedance, sensed R-wave, stored electrograms) is essential in order to understand the nature of inappropriate ICD discharges and to select the most appropriate solution.Keywords
This publication has 34 references indexed in Scilit:
- Long-Term Comparison of the Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Versus AmiodaroneCirculation, 2004
- Rhythm Discrimination by Rate Branch and QRS Morphology in Dual Chamber Implantable Cardioverter DefibrillatorsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2003
- Combined Use of Morphology Discrimination, Sudden Onset, and Stability as Discriminating Algorithms in Single Chamber Cardioverter DefibrillatorsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 2002
- Prophylactic Implantation of a Defibrillator in Patients with Myocardial Infarction and Reduced Ejection FractionNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Supraventricular Tachycardia‐Ventricular Tachycardia Discrimination Algorithms in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: State‐of‐the‐Art ReviewJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 2001
- Dual Chamber Arrhythmia Detection in the Implantable Cardioverter DefibrillatorJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 2000
- A Randomized Study of the Prevention of Sudden Death in Patients with Coronary Artery DiseaseNew England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Complications of Third‐Generation Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator TherapyPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1999
- A Comparison of Antiarrhythmic-Drug Therapy with Implantable Defibrillators in Patients Resuscitated from Near-Fatal Ventricular ArrhythmiasNew England Journal of Medicine, 1997
- Improved Survival with an Implanted Defibrillator in Patients with Coronary Disease at High Risk for Ventricular ArrhythmiaNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996