Cargando…

Does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases?

AIMS: Advanced cardiac disease, entailing more hypertrophy, fibrosis, scarring, dilatation and conduction delays, poses the question of whether defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) increase as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) decreases. This question has been approached indirectly or insufficie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Val-Mejias, Jesus E., Oza, Ashish
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2825386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20047925
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/eup408
_version_ 1782177812586692608
author Val-Mejias, Jesus E.
Oza, Ashish
author_facet Val-Mejias, Jesus E.
Oza, Ashish
author_sort Val-Mejias, Jesus E.
collection PubMed
description AIMS: Advanced cardiac disease, entailing more hypertrophy, fibrosis, scarring, dilatation and conduction delays, poses the question of whether defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) increase as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) decreases. This question has been approached indirectly or insufficiently in previous studies. In this study we add and expand on our previous work, stratifying DFT for various LVEF ranges. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective analysis included DFT data from three acute, multicentre, randomized studies that included 230 ICD/CRT-D patients. All DFTs were obtained with the SVC coil turned ON and with pulse-width optimized waveforms based on a 3.5 ms membrane time constant. As the LVEF decreased, DFT estimates increased from 395.2 ± 115 V for LVEF ≥ 46% to 425.8 ± 117.6 V for LVEF ≤ 25%. However, these changes in DFT estimates were very minor and not statistically significant. Only 3% of the patients in this population had an elevated DFT of >20 J. CONCLUSION: This analysis shows that over a very broad range of LVEF, DFT changes minimally (approximately 1 J), if at all. Our results are consistent with previous studies that demonstrated no difference in the DFT estimates: (a) between patient groups receiving ICD (typically higher LVEF) vs. CRT-D (typically lower LVEF) and (b) between patient groups receiving a device for primary prevention indications (typically lower LVEF) vs. secondary prevention indications (typically higher LVEF).
format Text
id pubmed-2825386
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28253862010-02-22 Does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases? Val-Mejias, Jesus E. Oza, Ashish Europace Clinical Research AIMS: Advanced cardiac disease, entailing more hypertrophy, fibrosis, scarring, dilatation and conduction delays, poses the question of whether defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) increase as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) decreases. This question has been approached indirectly or insufficiently in previous studies. In this study we add and expand on our previous work, stratifying DFT for various LVEF ranges. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective analysis included DFT data from three acute, multicentre, randomized studies that included 230 ICD/CRT-D patients. All DFTs were obtained with the SVC coil turned ON and with pulse-width optimized waveforms based on a 3.5 ms membrane time constant. As the LVEF decreased, DFT estimates increased from 395.2 ± 115 V for LVEF ≥ 46% to 425.8 ± 117.6 V for LVEF ≤ 25%. However, these changes in DFT estimates were very minor and not statistically significant. Only 3% of the patients in this population had an elevated DFT of >20 J. CONCLUSION: This analysis shows that over a very broad range of LVEF, DFT changes minimally (approximately 1 J), if at all. Our results are consistent with previous studies that demonstrated no difference in the DFT estimates: (a) between patient groups receiving ICD (typically higher LVEF) vs. CRT-D (typically lower LVEF) and (b) between patient groups receiving a device for primary prevention indications (typically lower LVEF) vs. secondary prevention indications (typically higher LVEF). Oxford University Press 2010-03 2010-01-03 /pmc/articles/PMC2825386/ /pubmed/20047925 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/eup408 Text en Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2010. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/ The online version of this article has been published under an open access model. Users are entitled to use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the open access version of this article for non-commercial purposes provided that the original authorship is properly and fully attributed; the Journal, Learned Society and Oxford University Press are attributed as the original place of publication with correct citation details given; if an article is subsequently reproduced or disseminated not in its entirety but only in part or as a derivative work this must be clearly indicated. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.
spellingShingle Clinical Research
Val-Mejias, Jesus E.
Oza, Ashish
Does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases?
title Does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases?
title_full Does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases?
title_fullStr Does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases?
title_full_unstemmed Does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases?
title_short Does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases?
title_sort does defibrillation threshold increase as left ventricular ejection fraction decreases?
topic Clinical Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2825386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20047925
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/eup408
work_keys_str_mv AT valmejiasjesuse doesdefibrillationthresholdincreaseasleftventricularejectionfractiondecreases
AT ozaashish doesdefibrillationthresholdincreaseasleftventricularejectionfractiondecreases