Skip to main content

How To Choose Between Single-Chamber and Dual-Chamber ICD

  • Conference paper
  • 468 Accesses

Abstract

Patients in whom an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is indicated and who have concomitant significant sinus-node disease or atrioventricular block may be candidates for a dual-chamber device. However, it is still a matter of debate whether the dual-chamber ICD is also advantageous for patients with preserved sinus and atrioventricular nodal function, as data from prospective randomized trials are limited. Overall, the number of implanted dual-chamber devices has been increasing and, according to the 2003 AIAC Registry data, accounted for one-third of all the defibrillators implanted in Italy, while single chamber devices made up 39%. The theoretical advantages of dual-chamber ICDs are: better supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) discrimination, optimal treatment of bradyarrhythmias (pre-existing or drug induced), and major hemodynamic benefits.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barold HS, Newby KH, Tomassoni G et al (1998) Prospective evaluation of new and old criteria to discriminate between supraventricular and ventricular tachycardia in implantable defibrillators. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 21:1347–1355

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Swerdlow CD, Chen PS, Kass RM et al (1994) Discrimination of ventricular tachycardia from sinus tachycardia and atrial fibrillation in a tiered-therapy cardioverter defibrillator. J Am Coll Cardiol 23:1342–1355

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Neuzner J, Pitschner HF, Schlepper (1995) Programmable VT detection enhancements in implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 18:539–547

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sadoul N, Jung W, Jordaens L et al (2002) Diagnostic performance of a dual-chamber cardioverter defibrillator programmed with nominal settings: a European prospective study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 13:25–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wilkoff BL, Kuhlkamp V, Volosin K et al (2001) Critical analysis of dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator arrhythmia detection. Results and technical considerations. Circulation 103:381–386

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Korte T, Jung W, Wolpert C et al (1998) A new classification algorithm for discrimination of ventricular from supraventricular tachycardia in a dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 9:70–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hintringer F, Schwarzacher S, Eibl G, Pachinger O (2001) Inappropriate detection of supraventricular arrhythmias by implantable dual chamber defibrillators: a comparison of four different algorithms. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 24:835–841

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Deisenhofer I, Kolb C, Ndrepepa G et al (2001 Do current dual chamber cardioverter defibrillators have advantages over conventional single chamber cardioverter defibrillator in reducing inappropriate therapies? A randomized, prospective study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 12:134–142

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Friedman PA, McClelland RL, Bamlet WR et al (2006) Dual-chamber versus single-chamber detection enhancements for implantable defibrillator rhythm diagnosis: the detect supraventricular tachycardia study. Circulation 113:2871–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hesselson AB, Parsonnet V, Bernstein AD, Bonavita GJ (1992) Deleterious effect of long-term single-chamber ventricular pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome: the hidden benefits of dual-chamber pacing. J Am Coll Cardiol 19:1542–1549

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Frielingsdorf J, Deseo T, Gerber AE, Bertel O (1996) A comparison of quality-of-life in patients with dual chamber pacemakers and individually programmed atrioventricular delays. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 19:1147–1154

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Harper GR, Pina IL, Kutalek SP (1991) Intrinsic conduction maximizes cardiopulmonary performance in patients with dual chamber pacemakers. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 14:1787–1791

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Wilkoff BL, Cook JR, Epstein AE et al (2002) The DAVID Trial Investigators: dual chamber pacing or ventricular backup pacing in patients with an implantable defibrillator. The Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator (DAVID) Trial. JAMA 288:3115–3123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kolb C, Deisenhofer I, Schmieder S et al (2006) Long-term follow-up of patients supplied with single-chamber or dual-chamber cardioverter defibrillators. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 29:946–952

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sukhija R, Aronow WS, Sorbera C et al (2005) Left ventricular ejection fraction and prevalence of new left ventricular wall motion abnormality at long-term follow-up in patients with automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillators treated with dual-chamber rate-responsive pacing at a rate of 70/minute versus backup ventricular pacing at a rate of 40/minute. Am J Cardiol 96:412–413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sweeney MO, Ellenbogen KA, Miller EH et al (2006) The Managed Ventricular pacing versus VVI 40 Pacing (MVP) Trial: clinical background, rationale, design, and implementation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 17:1295–1298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Schmitt C, Montero M, Melichercik J (1998) Significance of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with implanted pacing cardioverter defibrillators. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 17:295–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Grimm W, Flores BF, Marchlinski FE (1992) Electrocardiographically documented unnecessary, spontaneous shocks in 241 patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 15:1667–1673

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Marchlinski FE, Callans DJ, Gottlieb CD et al (1995) Benefits and lessons learned from stored electrogram information in implantable defibrillators. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 6:832–851

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Pinski SL, Yao Q, Epstein AE et al (2000 Determinants of outcome in patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias: the antiarrhythmic versus implantable defibrillators (AVID) study registry. Am Heart J 139:804–813

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Wolf PA, Mitchell JB, Baker CS et al (1998) Impact of atrial fibrillation on mortality, stroke and medical costs. Arch Intern Med 158:229–234

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ricci R, Pignalberi C, Disertori M et al (2002) Efficacy of a dual chamber defibrillator with atrial antitachycardia functions in treating spontaneous atrial tachyarrhythmias in patients with life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Eur Heart J 23:1471–1479

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Friedman PA, Dijkman B, Warman EN et al for the Worldwide Jewel AF Investigators (2001) Atrial therapies reduce atrial arrhythmia burden in defibrillator patients. Circulation 104:1023–1028

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this paper

Cite this paper

Del Greco, M., Gramegna, L., Marini, M., Disertori, M. (2007). How To Choose Between Single-Chamber and Dual-Chamber ICD. In: Gulizia, M.M. (eds) Current News in Cardiology. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-0636-2_31

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-0636-2_31

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-0635-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-0636-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics