Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Incidence of very high defibrillation thresholds (DFT) and efficacy of subcutaneous (SQ) array insertion during implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation

  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The incidence, risk factors, and management of very high defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) during present-day implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) testing are not well known.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to assess (1) the incidence of very high DFTs and (2) the efficacy/safety of routinely adding a subcutaneous (SQ) array for these patients.

Methods

The study evaluated patients undergoing first-time ICD implantation at Southlake Regional Healthcare Centre from January 2006 to December 2007. All implanted ICDs had a maximal output of 35 J. Patients with DFTs greater than a 10-J safety margin from maximum output were considered to have very high readings and underwent SQ array insertion after other attempts at lowering DFT (group I). These patients were compared with the rest of the patients who had acceptable DFTs (group II) using both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. Outcomes of array insertion were also assessed.

Results

A total of 313 patients underwent first-time ICD implantation during the analysis period. Of those, 16 (5.1%) had very high DFTs (group I). By univariate analysis, advanced New York Heart Association class (3 or 4), congestive heart failure hospitalization, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, amiodarone use, implant of a biventricular device, and highest quartile of left ventricular (LV) chamber enlargement were all significant predictors of very high DFTs (p < 0.05). By multivariate analysis, only amiodarone use [odds ratio (OR) = 10.3, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 3.7–32.6] and being in the highest quartile for LV diastolic diameter [OR = 5.4, 95% CI = 1.4–20.8] predicted very high DFT. In all 16 cases, other methods to lower DFT prior to array insertion were attempted but failed for all patients: reversing shock polarity (n = 15), removing the superior vena cava coil (n = 14), reprogramming shock waveform (n = 9), and repositioning right ventricular lead (n = 9). Addition of the array successfully decreased DFT to within safety margin for all patients (33 ± 2 vs 21 ± 5 J, p = 0.02). Complication due to array insertion occurred in one patient (pneumothorax).

Conclusions

Very high DFTs occur in about 5% of patients undergoing ICD implantation and may be predicted by LV dilation and amiodarone use. SQ array insertion reliably corrects this problem over other interventions with a low rate of procedural complication.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CHF:

Congestive heart failure

DFT:

Defibrillation threshold

EF:

Ejection fraction

ICD:

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator

LV:

Left ventricular

NYHA:

New York Heart Association class

SQ array:

Subcutaneous array

SVC:

Superior vena cava

VF:

Ventricular fibrillation

VT:

Ventricular tachycardia

References

  1. Pires, L. A., & Johnson, K. M. (2006). Intraoperative testing of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: how much is enough? Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 17(2), 140–145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Russo, A. M., Sauer, W., Gerstenfeld, E. P., et al. (2005). Defibrillation threshold testing: is it really necessary at the time of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator insertion? Heart Rhythm, 2(5), 456–461.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gold, M. R., Higgins, S., Klein, R., et al. (2002). Efficacy and temporal stability of reduced safety margins for ventricular defibrillation: primary results from the Low Energy Safety Study (LESS). Circulation, 105(17), 2043–2048.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kuhlkamp, V., Dornberger, V., Khalighi, K., et al. (1998). Effect of a single element subcutaneous array electrode added to a transvenous electrode configuration on the defibrillation field and the defibrillation threshold. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 21(12), 2596–2605.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Trusty, J. M., Hayes, D. L., Stanton, M. S., et al. (2000). Factors affecting the frequency of subcutaneous lead usage in implantable defibrillators. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 23(5), 842–846.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ideker, R. E., Epstein, A. E., & Plumb, V. J. (2005). Should shocks still be administered during implantable cardioverter-defibrillator insertion? Heart Rhythm, 2(5), 462–463.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Theuns, D. A., Szili-Torok, T., & Jordaens, L. J. (2005). Defibrillation efficacy testing: long-term follow-up and mortality. Europace, 7(6), 509–515.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mainigi, S. K., & Callans, D. J. (2006). How to manage the patient with a high defibrillation threshold. Heart Rhythm, 3(4), 492–495.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Day, J. D., Olshansky, B., Moore, S., et al. (2008). High defibrillation energy requirements are encountered rarely with modern dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems. Europace, 10(3), 347–350.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hodgson, D. M., Olsovsky, M. R., Shorofsky, S. R., et al. (2002). Clinical predictors of defibrillation thresholds with an active pectoral pulse generator lead system. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 25(4 Pt 1), 408–413.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lubinski, A., Lewicka-Nowak, E., Zienciuk, A., et al. (2005). Clinical predictors of defibrillation threshold in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Kardiologia Polska, 62(4), 317–328. discussion 329–331.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shukla, H. H., Flaker, G. C., Jayam, V., et al. (2003). High defibrillation thresholds in transvenous biphasic implantable defibrillators: clinical predictors and prognostic implications. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 26(1 Pt 1), 44–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Birnie, D., Tung, S., Simpson, C., et al. (2008). Complications associated with defibrillation threshold testing: the Canadian experience. Heart Rhythm, 5(3), 387–390.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hohnloser, S. H., Dorian, P., Roberts, R., et al. (2006). Effect of amiodarone and sotalol on ventricular defibrillation threshold: the optimal pharmacological therapy in cardioverter defibrillator patients (OPTIC) trial. Circulation, 114(2), 104–109.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bollmann, A., Husser, D., & Cannom, D. S. (2005). Antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs, 5(6), 371–378.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schuger, C., Ellenbogen, K. A., Faddis, M., et al. (2006). Defibrillation energy requirements in an ICD population receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 17(3), 247–250.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kettering, K., Mewis, C., Dornberger, V., et al. (2004). Long-term experience with subcutaneous ICD leads: a comparison among three different types of subcutaneous leads. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 27(10), 1355–1361.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zienciuk, A., Lubinski, A., Krolak, T., et al. (2007). Effects of shock polarity reversal on defibrillation threshold in an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Kardiologia Polska, 65(5), 495–500. discussion 501–492.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Keane, D., Aweh, N., Hynes, B., et al. (2007). Achieving sufficient safety margins with fixed duration waveforms and the use of multiple time constants. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 30(5), 596–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Blatt, J. A., Poole, J. E., Johnson, G. W., et al. (2008). No benefit from defibrillation threshold testing in the SCD-HeFT (Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial). Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 52(7), 551–556.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Southlake Heart Rhythm Program, Southlake Regional Health Centre, 105-712 Davis Drive, Newmarket, ON, Canada, L3Y 8C3

    Atul Verma, Alexander J. Kaplan, Bradley Sarak, Richard Oosthuizen, Marianne Beardsall, Jan Higgenbottam, Zaev Wulffhart & Yaariv Khaykin

Authors
  1. Atul Verma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander J. Kaplan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bradley Sarak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Richard Oosthuizen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marianne Beardsall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jan Higgenbottam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Zaev Wulffhart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yaariv Khaykin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atul Verma.

Additional information

No financial support was received for this study. No potential conflicts of interest arise from the publication of this manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Verma, A., Kaplan, A.J., Sarak, B. et al. Incidence of very high defibrillation thresholds (DFT) and efficacy of subcutaneous (SQ) array insertion during implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 29, 127–133 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-010-9511-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-010-9511-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation