Measurement of body surface energy leakage of defibrillation shock by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator

被引:3
|
作者
Niwano, S
Kojima, J
Inuo, K
Saito, J
Kashiwa, T
Suyama, M
Toyoshima, T
Aizawa, Y
Izumi, T
机构
[1] Kitasato Univ, Sch Med, Dept Internal Med, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 2288555, Japan
[2] Medtron Japan Co Ltd, Tachy Business Grp, Tokyo, Japan
[3] Medtron Japan Co Ltd, Res & Dev, Tokyo, Japan
[4] Niigata Univ, Sch Med, Dept Internal Med 1, Niigata, Japan
来源
PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY | 2002年 / 25卷 / 08期
关键词
defibrillation; electrical stimulation; electrical shock; tachyarrhythmias; antitachycardia device;
D O I
10.1046/j.1460-9592.2002.01212.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Leakage of electrical current from the body surface during a defibrillation shock delivery by an ICD device was evaluated in 27 patients with life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias. All patients underwent the implantation of the Medtronic jewel Plus ICD system, and the defibrillation shocks were delivered between the active can implanted in the left subclavicular region and the endocardial lead placed in the right ventricle. At the time of measurement of the effect of electrical energy delivery for defibrillation, the shocks were delivered in a biphasic form at the energy level of 20 or 30 J. During each delivery of the defibrillation shock, the electrical current to the body surface was measured through large skin electrodes (6.2 cm(2)) that were pasted at the following positions: (1) parallel position: the electrodes were placed at the left shoulder and the right low-chest, and the direction of the electrode vector was parallel to the direction of the defibrillation energy flow, and (2) cross position: the electrodes were placed at the right shoulder and the left low-chest, and the vector of the electrodes was roughly perpendicular to the direction of the energy flow. The energy leakages were measured in 80 defibrillation shocks. The peak leakage current during the shock delivery at energy of 30 J was 48 +/- 26 mA at the parallel position and 19 +/- 15 mA at the cross position (P = 0.0002). The energy leakage at a 30-J shock was 7.4 +/- 7.2 mJ at the parallel position and 1.4 +/- 2.3 mJ at the cross position (P = 0.0002). The actual maximum energy leakage was 105 mA, 29 mJ, and 106 V that appeared at the parallel position. The body surface leakage of the defibrillation energy of the ICD device was evaluated. The power of the energy leakage strongly depended on the angle between the alignment of the recording electrodes and the direction of the energy flow. The highest current leakage to the body surface reached a considerable level, but the energy leakage was small because of the short duration of the defibrillation shock.
引用
收藏
页码:1212 / 1218
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] The association between defibrillation shock energy and acute cardiac damage in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators
    Ishigaki, Daisuke
    Kutsuzawa, Daisuke
    Arimoto, Takanori
    Iwayama, Tadateru
    Hashimoto, Naoaki
    Kumagai, Yu
    Nishiyama, Satoshi
    Takahashi, Hiroki
    Shishido, Tetsuro
    Miyamoto, Takuya
    Nitobe, Joji
    Fukui, Akio
    Watanabe, Tetsu
    Kubota, Isao
    JOURNAL OF ARRHYTHMIA, 2016, 32 (06) : 481 - 485
  • [42] Inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shock in unusual circumstances
    Suran, Maria-Claudia-Berenice
    Margulescu, Andrei-Dumitru
    Siliste, Calin
    Vinereanu, Dragos
    ACTA CARDIOLOGICA, 2016, 71 (03) : 369 - 370
  • [43] Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Oversensing Due to Electric Shock
    Jurcevic, Ruzica
    Angelkov, Lazar
    Vukajlovic, Dejan
    Ristic, Velibor
    Tomovic, Milosav
    Djukanovic, Bosko
    SRPSKI ARHIV ZA CELOKUPNO LEKARSTVO, 2010, 138 (3-4) : 236 - 239
  • [44] Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator failure unmasked by a "lucky" shock
    Eng, Lim K.
    Walters, Tomos E.
    Gould, Paul A.
    JOURNAL OF ARRHYTHMIA, 2012, 28 (04) : 254 - 257
  • [45] Measurement of patient fears about implantable cardioverter defibrillator shock: An initial evaluation of the Florida Shock Anxiety Scale
    Kuhl, Emily A.
    Dixit, Neha K.
    Walker, Robyn L.
    Conti, Jamie B.
    Sears, Samuel F.
    PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2006, 29 (06): : 614 - 618
  • [46] EFFECTS OF PROCAINAMIDE AND LIDOCAINE ON DEFIBRILLATION ENERGY-REQUIREMENTS IN PATIENTS RECEIVING IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATOR DEVICES
    ECHT, DS
    GREMILLION, ST
    LEE, JT
    RODEN, DM
    MURRAY, KT
    BORGANELLI, M
    CRAWFORD, DM
    STEWART, JR
    HAMMON, JW
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 1994, 5 (09) : 752 - 760
  • [47] Probability of successful defibrillation at multiples of the defibrillation energy requirement in patients with an implantable defibrillator
    Strickberger, A
    Daoud, EG
    Davidson, T
    Weiss, R
    Bogun, F
    Knight, BP
    Bahu, M
    Goyal, R
    Man, KC
    Morady, F
    CIRCULATION, 1997, 96 (04) : 1217 - 1223
  • [48] SHOCK WITHOUT WIRES: A LOOK AT SUBCUTANEOUS IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATOR COMPARED TO TRANSVENOUS IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATOR FOR VENTRICULAR ARRHYTHMIAS
    Guice, K. C.
    Raja, J.
    Oberoi, M.
    Khouzam, R.
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE MEDICINE, 2021, 69 (02) : 493 - 493
  • [49] Shock Without Wires: A Look at Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Compared to Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Ventricular Arrhythmias
    Raja, Joel
    Guice, Kenneth
    Oberoi, Mansi
    Whitwell, Samantha
    Asbeutah, Abdul Aziz
    Russell, Alex
    Khouzam, Rami N.
    CURRENT PROBLEMS IN CARDIOLOGY, 2022, 47 (09)
  • [50] Follow-up of patients with implanted implantable cardioverter defibrillator without defibrillation test
    Femenia, Francisco J.
    Penafort, Fernando
    Arce, Mauricio
    Arrieta, Martin
    Gutierrez, Daniel
    REVISTA DE LA FEDERACION ARGENTINA DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2009, 38 (03): : 132 - 137