Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2020
Low-voltage shock impedance measurements: A false sense of security.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Parwani Abdul Shokor, Lacour Philipp, Franke Philip, Reichert Uwe, Christoph Klein, Beiert Thomas, Supryn Rafal, Rangasamy Karthikeyan, Kull Tony, Hohendanner Felix, Heinzel Frank, Kucher Andreas, Boldt Leif-Hendrik, Pieske Burkert, Blaschke Florian
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators use low-voltage shock impedance measurements to monitor the lead integrity. However, previous case reports suggest that low-voltage shock impedance measurements may fail to detect insulation breaches that can cause life-threatening electrical short circuits.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We report six cases of insulation breaches in transvenous defibrillation leads that were not obvious during standard interrogations and testing of the lead beforehand. In two cases, an electrical short circuit during commanded shock delivery for internal electrical cardioversion resulted in a total damage of the ICD generator. In one of these cases, commanded shock delivery induced ventricular fibrillation, which required external defibrillation. In two cases, a shock due to ventricular tachycardia was aborted as the shock impedance was less than 20 Ω. However, in both cases the tiny residual shock energy terminated the ventricular tachycardia. In contrast, in one case the residual energy of the aborted shock did not end ventricular fibrillation induced at defibrillator threshold testing. In one case, the ICD indicated an error code for a short circuit condition detected during an adequate shock delivery.
CONCLUSIONS: This case series illustrates that low-voltage shock impedance measurements can fail to detect insulation breaches. These data suggest that in patients without a contraindication, traditional defibrillator threshold testing or high voltage synchronized shock at the time of device replacement should be considered.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We report six cases of insulation breaches in transvenous defibrillation leads that were not obvious during standard interrogations and testing of the lead beforehand. In two cases, an electrical short circuit during commanded shock delivery for internal electrical cardioversion resulted in a total damage of the ICD generator. In one of these cases, commanded shock delivery induced ventricular fibrillation, which required external defibrillation. In two cases, a shock due to ventricular tachycardia was aborted as the shock impedance was less than 20 Ω. However, in both cases the tiny residual shock energy terminated the ventricular tachycardia. In contrast, in one case the residual energy of the aborted shock did not end ventricular fibrillation induced at defibrillator threshold testing. In one case, the ICD indicated an error code for a short circuit condition detected during an adequate shock delivery.
CONCLUSIONS: This case series illustrates that low-voltage shock impedance measurements can fail to detect insulation breaches. These data suggest that in patients without a contraindication, traditional defibrillator threshold testing or high voltage synchronized shock at the time of device replacement should be considered.