Additional coils mitigate elevated defibrillation threshold in right-sided implantable cardioverter defibrillator generator placement: a simulation study

被引:1
作者
Qian, Shuang [1 ]
Monaci, Sofia [1 ]
Mendonca-Costa, Caroline [1 ]
Campos, Fernando [1 ]
Gemmell, Philip [1 ]
Zaidi, Hassan A. [1 ]
Rajani, Ronak [2 ]
Whitaker, John [1 ,2 ]
Rinaldi, Christopher A. [1 ,2 ]
Bishop, Martin J. [1 ]
机构
[1] St Thomas Hosp, Kings Coll London, Sch Imaging Sci & Biomed Engn, Dept Biomed Engn, 4th North Wing, London SE1 7EH, England
[2] Guys & St Thomas Hosp, Dept Cardiol, Westminster Bridge Rd, London SE1 7EH, England
来源
EUROPACE | 2023年 / 25卷 / 06期
基金
英国工程与自然科学研究理事会; 英国惠康基金; 英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Computational modelling; Implantable cardioverter defibrillator; Defibrillation threshold; Right-sided generator; CT imaging; SINGLE-COIL; DUAL-COIL; ICD DEFIBRILLATION; LEAD; HEART; POSITION; OUTCOMES; PERFORMANCE; EFFICACY; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1093/europace/euad146
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aims The standard implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) generator (can) is placed in the left pectoral area; however, in certain circumstances, right-sided cans may be required which may increase defibrillation threshold (DFT) due to suboptimal shock vectors. We aim to quantitatively assess whether the potential increase in DFT of right-sided can configurations may be mitigated by alternate positioning of the right ventricular (RV) shocking coil or adding coils in the superior vena cava (SVC) and coronary sinus (CS). Methods and results A cohort of CT-derived torso models was used to assess DFT of ICD configurations with right-sided cans and alternate positioning of RV shock coils. Efficacy changes with additional coils in the SVC and CS were evaluated. A right-sided can with an apical RV shock coil significantly increased DFT compared to a left-sided can [19.5 (16.4, 27.1) J vs. 13.3 (11.7, 19.9) J, P < 0.001]. Septal positioning of the RV coil led to a further DFT increase when using a right-sided can [26.7 (18.1, 36.1) J vs. 19.5 (16.4, 27.1) J, P < 0.001], but not a left-sided can [12.1 (8.1, 17.6) J vs. 13.3 (11.7, 19.9) J, P = 0.099). Defibrillation threshold of a right-sided can with apical or septal coil was reduced the most by adding both SVC and CS coils [19.5 (16.4, 27.1) J vs. 6.6 (3.9, 9.9) J, P < 0.001, and 26.7 (18.1, 36.1) J vs. 12.1 (5.7, 13.5) J, P < 0.001]. Conclusion Right-sided, compared to left-sided, can positioning results in a 50% increase in DFT. For right-sided cans, apical shock coil positioning produces a lower DFT than septal positions. Elevated right-sided can DFTs may be mitigated by utilizing additional coils in SVC and CS.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 49 条
  • [31] A randomized prospective study of single coil versus dual coil defibrillation in patients with ventricular arrhythmias undergoing implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy
    Rinaldi, CA
    Simon, RDB
    Geelen, P
    Reek, S
    Baszko, A
    Kuehl, M
    Gill, JS
    [J]. PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2003, 26 (08): : 1684 - 1690
  • [32] Coronary vein defibrillator coil placement in patients with high defibrillation thresholds
    Rodriguez-Manero, Moises
    Kreidieh, Bahij
    Ibarra-Cortez, Sergio H.
    Alvarez, Paulino
    Schurmann, Paul
    Dave, Amish S.
    Valderrabano, Miguel
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARRHYTHMIA, 2019, 35 (01) : 79 - 85
  • [33] A biventricular ICD system with biventricular defibrillation
    Spurrell, P
    Gandhi, M
    Rinaldi, CA
    [J]. PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2006, 29 (03): : 334 - 336
  • [34] A publicly available virtual cohort of four-chamber heart meshes for cardiac electro-mechanics simulations
    Strocchi, Marina
    Augustin, Christoph M.
    Gsell, Matthias A. F.
    Karabelas, Elias
    Neic, Aurel
    Gillette, Karli
    Razeghi, Orod
    Prassl, Anton J.
    Vigmond, Edward J.
    Behar, Jonathan M.
    Gould, Justin
    Sidhu, Baldeep
    Rinaldi, Christopher A.
    Bishop, Martin J.
    Plank, Gernot
    Niederer, Steven A.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (06):
  • [35] Outcomes with single-coil versus dual-coil implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a meta-analysis
    Sunderland, Nicholas
    Kaura, Amit
    Murgatroyd, Francis
    Dhillon, Para
    Scott, Paul A.
    [J]. EUROPACE, 2018, 20 (03): : E21 - E29
  • [36] Measuring defibrillator surface potentials: The validation of a predictive defibrillation computer model
    Tate, Jess
    Stinstra, Jeroen
    Pilcher, Thomas
    Poursaid, Ahrash
    Jolley, Matthew A.
    Saarel, Elizabeth
    Triedman, John
    MacLeo, Rob S.
    [J]. COMPUTERS IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2018, 102 : 402 - 410
  • [37] Validating defibrillation simulation in a human-shaped phantom
    Tate, Jess D.
    Pilcher, Thomas A.
    Aras, Kedar K.
    Burton, Brett M.
    MacLeod, Rob S.
    [J]. HEART RHYTHM, 2020, 17 (04) : 661 - 668
  • [38] Non-traditional implantable cardioverter-defibrillator configurations and insertion techniques: a review of contemporary options
    Tonko, Johanna B.
    Rinaldi, Christopher A.
    [J]. EUROPACE, 2022, 24 (02): : 181 - 192
  • [39] Right pectoral implantable cardioverter defibrillators: role of the proximal (SVC) coil
    Varma, Niraj
    Efimov, Igor
    [J]. PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2008, 31 (08): : 1025 - 1035
  • [40] Defibrillation thresholds with right pectoral implantable cardioverter defibrillators and impact of waveform tuning (the Tilt and Tune trial)
    Varma, Niraj
    Schaerf, Raymond
    Kalbfleisch, Steven
    Pimentel, Rhea
    Kroll, Mark W.
    Oza, Ashish
    [J]. EUROPACE, 2017, 19 (11): : 1810 - 1817