Cargando…
ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing—The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial
BACKGROUND: The placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has become routine practice to protect high risk patients from sudden cardiac death. However, implantation-related myocardial micro-damage and its relation to different implantation strategies are poorly characterized. METH...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4514854/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26208329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131570 |
_version_ | 1782382826972250112 |
---|---|
author | Semmler, Verena Biermann, Jürgen Haller, Bernhard Jilek, Clemens Sarafoff, Nikolaus Lennerz, Carsten Vrazic, Hrvoje Zrenner, Bernhard Asbach, Stefan Kolb, Christof |
author_facet | Semmler, Verena Biermann, Jürgen Haller, Bernhard Jilek, Clemens Sarafoff, Nikolaus Lennerz, Carsten Vrazic, Hrvoje Zrenner, Bernhard Asbach, Stefan Kolb, Christof |
author_sort | Semmler, Verena |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has become routine practice to protect high risk patients from sudden cardiac death. However, implantation-related myocardial micro-damage and its relation to different implantation strategies are poorly characterized. METHODS: A total of 194 ICD recipients (64±12 years, 83% male, 95% primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, 35% cardiac resynchronization therapy) were randomly assigned to one of three implantation strategies: (1) ICD implantation without any defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing, (2) estimation of the DFT without arrhythmia induction (modified “upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) testing”) or (3) traditional safety margin testing including ventricular arrhythmia induction. High-sensitive Troponin T (hsTnT) levels were determined prior to the implantation and 6 hours after. RESULTS: All three groups showed a postoperative increase of hsTnT. The mean delta was 0.031±0.032 ng/ml for patients without DFT testing, 0.080±0.067 ng/ml for the modified ULV-testing and 0.064±0.056 ng/ml for patients with traditional safety margin testing. Delta hsTnT was significantly larger in both of the groups with intraoperative ICD testing compared to the non-testing strategy (p≤0.001 each). There was no statistical difference in delta hsTnT between the two groups with intraoperative ICD testing (p = 0.179). CONCLUSION: High-sensitive Troponin T release during ICD implantation is significantly higher in patients with intraoperative ICD testing using shock applications compared to those without testing. Shock applications, with or without arrhythmia induction, did not result in a significantly different delta hsTnT. Hence, the ICD shock itself and not ventricular fibrillation seems to cause myocardial micro-damage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01230086 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4514854 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45148542015-07-29 ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing—The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial Semmler, Verena Biermann, Jürgen Haller, Bernhard Jilek, Clemens Sarafoff, Nikolaus Lennerz, Carsten Vrazic, Hrvoje Zrenner, Bernhard Asbach, Stefan Kolb, Christof PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has become routine practice to protect high risk patients from sudden cardiac death. However, implantation-related myocardial micro-damage and its relation to different implantation strategies are poorly characterized. METHODS: A total of 194 ICD recipients (64±12 years, 83% male, 95% primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, 35% cardiac resynchronization therapy) were randomly assigned to one of three implantation strategies: (1) ICD implantation without any defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing, (2) estimation of the DFT without arrhythmia induction (modified “upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) testing”) or (3) traditional safety margin testing including ventricular arrhythmia induction. High-sensitive Troponin T (hsTnT) levels were determined prior to the implantation and 6 hours after. RESULTS: All three groups showed a postoperative increase of hsTnT. The mean delta was 0.031±0.032 ng/ml for patients without DFT testing, 0.080±0.067 ng/ml for the modified ULV-testing and 0.064±0.056 ng/ml for patients with traditional safety margin testing. Delta hsTnT was significantly larger in both of the groups with intraoperative ICD testing compared to the non-testing strategy (p≤0.001 each). There was no statistical difference in delta hsTnT between the two groups with intraoperative ICD testing (p = 0.179). CONCLUSION: High-sensitive Troponin T release during ICD implantation is significantly higher in patients with intraoperative ICD testing using shock applications compared to those without testing. Shock applications, with or without arrhythmia induction, did not result in a significantly different delta hsTnT. Hence, the ICD shock itself and not ventricular fibrillation seems to cause myocardial micro-damage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01230086 Public Library of Science 2015-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4514854/ /pubmed/26208329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131570 Text en © 2015 Semmler et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Semmler, Verena Biermann, Jürgen Haller, Bernhard Jilek, Clemens Sarafoff, Nikolaus Lennerz, Carsten Vrazic, Hrvoje Zrenner, Bernhard Asbach, Stefan Kolb, Christof ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing—The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial |
title | ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing—The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial |
title_full | ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing—The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial |
title_fullStr | ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing—The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing—The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial |
title_short | ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing—The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial |
title_sort | icd shock, not ventricular fibrillation, causes elevation of high sensitive troponin t after defibrillation threshold testing—the prospective, randomized, multicentre tropshock-trial |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4514854/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26208329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131570 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT semmlerverena icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT biermannjurgen icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT hallerbernhard icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT jilekclemens icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT sarafoffnikolaus icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT lennerzcarsten icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT vrazichrvoje icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT zrennerbernhard icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT asbachstefan icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial AT kolbchristof icdshocknotventricularfibrillationcauseselevationofhighsensitivetroponintafterdefibrillationthresholdtestingtheprospectiverandomizedmulticentretropshocktrial |