Cargando…
Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation
BACKGROUND: The incidence and impact of noise in a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S‐ICD) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is not well established. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients implanted with LVAD and with a pre‐existing S‐ICD b...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10068942/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37021015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12826 |
_version_ | 1785018760470462464 |
---|---|
author | Khetarpal, Banveet Kaur Javaid, Awad Lee, Justin Z. Kusumoto, Fred Mulpuru, Siva K. Sorajja, Dan Cha, Yong‐Mei Srivathsan, Komandoor |
author_facet | Khetarpal, Banveet Kaur Javaid, Awad Lee, Justin Z. Kusumoto, Fred Mulpuru, Siva K. Sorajja, Dan Cha, Yong‐Mei Srivathsan, Komandoor |
author_sort | Khetarpal, Banveet Kaur |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The incidence and impact of noise in a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S‐ICD) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is not well established. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients implanted with LVAD and with a pre‐existing S‐ICD between January 2005 and December 2020 at the three Mayo Clinic centers (Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida). RESULTS: Of the 908 LVAD patients, a pre‐existing S‐ICD was present in 9 patients (mean age 49.1 ± 13.7 years, 66.7% males), 100% with Boston Scientific third‐generation EMBLEM MRI S‐ICD, 11% with HeartMate II (HM II), 44% with HeartMate 3 (HM 3), and 44% with HeartWare (HW) LVAD. The incidence of noise from LVAD‐related electromagnetic interference (EMI) was 33% and was only seen with HM 3 LVAD. Multiple measures attempted to resolve noise, including using alternative S‐ICD sensing vector, adjusting S‐ICD time zone, and increasing LVAD pump speed, were unsuccessful, necessitating S‐ICD device therapies to be turned off permanently. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of LVAD‐related S‐ICD noise is high in patients with concomitant LVAD and S‐ICD with significant impact on device function. As conservative management failed to resolve the EMI, the S‐ICDs had to be programmed off to avoid inappropriate shocks. This study highlights the importance of awareness of LVAD‐SICD device interference and the need to improve S‐ICD detection algorithms to eliminate noise. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10068942 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100689422023-04-04 Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation Khetarpal, Banveet Kaur Javaid, Awad Lee, Justin Z. Kusumoto, Fred Mulpuru, Siva K. Sorajja, Dan Cha, Yong‐Mei Srivathsan, Komandoor J Arrhythm Original Articles BACKGROUND: The incidence and impact of noise in a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S‐ICD) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is not well established. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients implanted with LVAD and with a pre‐existing S‐ICD between January 2005 and December 2020 at the three Mayo Clinic centers (Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida). RESULTS: Of the 908 LVAD patients, a pre‐existing S‐ICD was present in 9 patients (mean age 49.1 ± 13.7 years, 66.7% males), 100% with Boston Scientific third‐generation EMBLEM MRI S‐ICD, 11% with HeartMate II (HM II), 44% with HeartMate 3 (HM 3), and 44% with HeartWare (HW) LVAD. The incidence of noise from LVAD‐related electromagnetic interference (EMI) was 33% and was only seen with HM 3 LVAD. Multiple measures attempted to resolve noise, including using alternative S‐ICD sensing vector, adjusting S‐ICD time zone, and increasing LVAD pump speed, were unsuccessful, necessitating S‐ICD device therapies to be turned off permanently. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of LVAD‐related S‐ICD noise is high in patients with concomitant LVAD and S‐ICD with significant impact on device function. As conservative management failed to resolve the EMI, the S‐ICDs had to be programmed off to avoid inappropriate shocks. This study highlights the importance of awareness of LVAD‐SICD device interference and the need to improve S‐ICD detection algorithms to eliminate noise. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-02-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10068942/ /pubmed/37021015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12826 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Heart Rhythm Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Khetarpal, Banveet Kaur Javaid, Awad Lee, Justin Z. Kusumoto, Fred Mulpuru, Siva K. Sorajja, Dan Cha, Yong‐Mei Srivathsan, Komandoor Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation |
title | Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation |
title_full | Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation |
title_fullStr | Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation |
title_full_unstemmed | Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation |
title_short | Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation |
title_sort | subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator noise following left ventricular assist device implantation |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10068942/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37021015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12826 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT khetarpalbanveetkaur subcutaneousimplantablecardioverterdefibrillatornoisefollowingleftventricularassistdeviceimplantation AT javaidawad subcutaneousimplantablecardioverterdefibrillatornoisefollowingleftventricularassistdeviceimplantation AT leejustinz subcutaneousimplantablecardioverterdefibrillatornoisefollowingleftventricularassistdeviceimplantation AT kusumotofred subcutaneousimplantablecardioverterdefibrillatornoisefollowingleftventricularassistdeviceimplantation AT mulpurusivak subcutaneousimplantablecardioverterdefibrillatornoisefollowingleftventricularassistdeviceimplantation AT sorajjadan subcutaneousimplantablecardioverterdefibrillatornoisefollowingleftventricularassistdeviceimplantation AT chayongmei subcutaneousimplantablecardioverterdefibrillatornoisefollowingleftventricularassistdeviceimplantation AT srivathsankomandoor subcutaneousimplantablecardioverterdefibrillatornoisefollowingleftventricularassistdeviceimplantation |