Transvalvular Impedance: Does It Allow Automatic Capture Detection?

  • M. G. Bongiorni
  • E. Soldati
  • G. Arena
  • F. Di Gregorio
  • A. Barbetta
  • F. Monese
  • M. Mariani
Conference paper


Hemodynamic sensors of implantable pacemakers are designed to record the intensity of myocardial mechanical activity to allow estimation of the current state of the inotropic cardiac regulation [1]. This information is generally used to drive a rate-responsive system, relying on the physiological correlation between cardiac rate and contractility [2, 3]. However, the assessment of ventricular contraction based on hemodynamic evidence might also have important applications in the surveillance of pacing effectiveness [4]. Such a control system would enhance patient safety and allow a reduction in the stimulation energy, increasing the lifetime of the implanted device.


Ventricular Pace Chronotropic Incompetence Implantable Pacemaker Stimulation Energy Standard Pace 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Daum DR, Jones BR, Lang DJ (2000) Hemodynamic sensors. Am J Cardiol 86 (Suppl):95K–100KPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chirife R, Tentori MC, Mazzetti H et al (2001) Hemodynamic sensors: are they all the same? In: Raviele A (ed) Cardiac arrhythmias 2001. Springer-Verlag Italia, Milan, pp 566–575Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Occhetta E, Bortnik M, Francalacci G et al (2001) How reliable and effective are hemodynamic sensors to correct chronotropic incompetence? In: Raviele A (ed) Cardiac arrhythmias 2001. Springer-Verlag Italia, Milan, pp 586–594Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alt E, Kriegler C, Fotuhi P et al (1992) Feasibility of using intracardiac impedance measurements for capture detection. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 15:1873–1879PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Di Gregorio F, Morra A, Finesso M, Bongiorni MG (1996) Transvalvular impedance (TVI) recording under electrical and pharmacological cardiac stimulation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 19:1689–1693PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morra A, Panarotto D, Santini P, Di Gregorio F (1997) Transvalvular impedance (TVI) sensing: a new way toward the hemodynamic control of cardiac pacing. In: Vardas PE (ed) Europace ′97. Monduzzi Editore, Bologna, pp 529–533Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gasparini M, Curnis A, Mantica M et al (2001) Hemodynamic sensors: what clinical value do they have in heart failure? In: Raviele A (ed) Cardiac arrhythmias 2001. Springer-Verlag Italia, Milan, pp 576–585Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bongiorni MG, Soldati E, Arena G et al (2001) Hemodynamic sensors: what clinical value do they have in chronotropic incompetence? In: Raviele A (ed) Cardiac arrhythmias 2001. Springer-Verlag Italia, Milan, pp 595–601Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Di Gregorio F, Curnis A, Pettini A et al (2002) Trans-valvular impedance (TVI) in the hemodynamic regulation of cardiac pacing. In: Mitro P, Pella D, Rybár R, Valolik G (eds) Cardiovascular diseases 2002. Monduzzi Editore, Bologna, pp 53–57Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bongiorni MG, Soldati E, Arena G et al (1997) Transvalvular impedance as a marker of cardiac activity. In: Vardas PE (ed) Europace ′97. Monduzzi Editore, Bologna, pp 525–528Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Velimirovic DB, Calovic Z, Di Gregorio F et al (1998) Transvalvular impedance as a tool for atrial and ventricular capture detection. In: Santini M (ed) VIII International Symposium on Progress in Clinical Pacing’free papers. CEPI, Roma, pp 81–83Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boriani G, Biffi M, Branzi A et al (2000) Benefits in projected pacemaker longevity and in pacing related costs conferred by automatic threshold tracking. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 23:1783–1787PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Simeon L, Duru F, Fluri M et al (2000) The impact of automatic threshold tracking on pulse generator longevity in patients with different chronic stimulation threshold. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 23:1788–1791PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clarke M, Liu B, Schüller H et al (1998) Automatic adjustment of pacemaker stimulation output correlated with continuously monitored capture thresholds: a multicen-ter study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 21:1567–1575PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lau C, Cameron DA, Nishimura SC et al (2000) A cardiac evoked response algorithm providing threshold tracking: a North American multicenter study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 23:953–959PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duru F, Bauersfeld U, Schüller H et al (2000) Threshold tracking pacing based on beat by beat evoked response detection: clinical benefits and potential problems. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 4:511–522PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Candinas R, Liu B, Leal J et al (2002) Impact of fusion avoidance on performance of the automatic threshold tracking feature in dual chamber pacemakers: a multicenter prospective randomized study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 25:1540–1545PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bennett T, Sharma A, Sutton R et al (1992) Development of a rate adaptive pacemaker based on the maximum rate-of-rise of right ventricular pressure (RV dP/dtmax). Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 15:219–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rickards AF, Bombardini T, Plicchi G et al (1996) An implantable intracardiac accele-rometer for monitoring myocardial contractility. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 19:2066–2071PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chirife R, Ortega DF, Salazar A (1993) Feasibility of measuring relative right ventricular volumes and ejection fraction with implantable rhythm control devices. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 16:1673–1683PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Osswald S, Cron T, Gradel C et al (2000) Closed-loop stimulation using intracardiac impedance as a sensor principle: correlation of right ventricular dP/dt max and intracardiac impedance during dobutamine stress test. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 23:1502–1508PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pinski SL, Trohman RG (2002) Interference in implanted cardiac devices, part I. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 25:1367–1381PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Plicchi G, Marcelli E, Parlapiano M et al (2002) PEA I and PEA II based implantable haemodynamic monitor: pre clinical studies in sheep. Europace 4:49–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. G. Bongiorni
    • 1
  • E. Soldati
    • 1
  • G. Arena
    • 1
  • F. Di Gregorio
    • 2
  • A. Barbetta
    • 2
  • F. Monese
    • 3
  • M. Mariani
    • 1
  1. 1.Cardiothoracic Department, Cisanello HospitalUniversity of PisaRubano (PD)Italy
  2. 2.Clinical Research UnitRubano (PD)Italy
  3. 3.R&D DepartmentMedico SpaRubano (PD)Italy

Personalised recommendations