Document Detail


Shock on T versus direct current voltage for induction of ventricular fibrillation: a randomized prospective comparison.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  14720161     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
VF is induced during ICD implantation to determine efficacy of therapy. Establishing the best clinical method of induction of VF would potentially be beneficial in reducing the number of induction attempts and reducing the frequency of inadvertent induction of VT. Commonly used methods to induce VF include shock in the T wave vulnerable period (T shock) and high frequency stimulation. This study compared the efficacy of T shock with a new induction method using a 9-V DC pulse. The study was a randomized, prospective, case crossover trial in patients receiving ICDs. VF was induced by T shock and DC in a randomized sequence during an ICD implant. VF was induced at least four times in each patient (two T shocks and two DC inductions) and with each induction; attempts were continued with modifications until successful. A paired evaluation between the T shock/DC induction was performed in 37 patients (28 men, age 64 +/- 12 years) with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.40 +/- 0.20. Arrhythmia indications were VT (n = 23), VF (n = 10), and VT/VF (n = 4). Drug therapy included amiodarone (n = 10), metoprolol (n = 6), digoxin (n = 1), and lidocaine (n = 1). The average T shock voltage was 207.0 +/- 16.1 V. The S1 cycle drive length was consistently 400 ms, and the mean S2 coupling interval was 317.8 +/- 19.6 ms. The length of time DC applied averaged 3.8 +/- 1.4 seconds. A total of 148 episodes of VF were included in the analysis. T shock induced VF with a cycle length of 213.5 +/- 35.1 ms, and DC induced VF with a cycle length of 214.6 +/- 34.5 ms (P = 0.86). Although VF was eventually induced for each randomization, the number of attempts required were dependent on the method of induction. The successful DC first attempt VF induction rate was 96%, with three patients requiring two attempts during one of the DC inductions. T shock had a 68% first attempt success rate with 21 patients requiring multiple T shocks to induce VF. All nine female patients had at least one unsuccessful first attempt T shock, which contributed to an overall unsuccessful first attempt induction rate significantly higher in women then men (36.1% vs 12.5%, P = 0.001). A constant DC voltage induction of VF may be more effective than T shock for induction of VF in a clinical setting because it reduces the number of attempts required to induce VF. By either method, VF appears to be more difficult to induce in women. DC induction has the advantage of simple programming of only duration of stimulation. These findings have implications particularly for ICD implantation with conscious sedation.
Authors:
Arjun D Sharma; Eric Fain; P Gearoid O'Neill; Anne Skadsen; Roger Damle; Jim Baker; Vinod Chauhan; Meir Mazuz; Terrance Ross; Ziaozheng Zhang
Publication Detail:
Type:  Clinical Trial; Comparative Study; Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE     Volume:  27     ISSN:  0147-8389     ISO Abbreviation:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol     Publication Date:  2004 Jan 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2004-01-14     Completed Date:  2004-06-01     Revised Date:  2006-11-15    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7803944     Medline TA:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  89-94     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Regional Cardiology Associates, Sacramento, California 95819, USA.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Amiodarone / therapeutic use
Defibrillators, Implantable*
Digoxin / therapeutic use
Electric Countershock / methods*
Female
Humans
Lidocaine / therapeutic use
Male
Metoprolol / therapeutic use
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Ventricular Fibrillation / etiology,  prevention & control*
Chemical
Reg. No./Substance:
137-58-6/Lidocaine; 1951-25-3/Amiodarone; 20830-75-5/Digoxin; 37350-58-6/Metoprolol

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Radiofrequency ablation of atrial flutter: a randomized controlled study of two anatomic approaches.
Next Document:  Cardioverter defibrillator implantation in a child with isolated noncompaction of the ventricular my...