Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimal programming of ICDs for prevention of appropriate and inappropriate shocks

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Expansion of indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) has led to a significant increase in the number of patients receiving ICDs and the number of lives saved because of ICD therapy. However, appropriate or inappropriate shocks are frequent and may result in a significant decrease in quality of life in patients with ICDs. Atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response, sinus tachycardia, atrial tachycardia or atrial flutter with rapid conduction, and other supraventricular tachycardias are the most common arrhythmias causing inappropriate therapy. Other causes include oversensing of diaphragmatic potentials or myopotentials, T-wave oversensing, double or triple counting of intracardiac signals, lead fractures or header connection problems, lead chatter or noise, and electromagnetic interference. Strategies to reduce inappropriate therapy using device programming rely on the ability to distinguish supraventricular and atrial arrhythmias from ventricular tachycardia. Avoiding therapy for nonsustained ventricular arrhythmias and increasing the role of antitachycardia pacing to terminate ventricular tachycardia are key approaches to reducing shocks for ventricular arrhythmias. Optimal programming holds great promise for decreasing the overall incidence of shock therapy and increasing ICD acceptance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Daubert JP, Zareba W, Cannom DS, et al.: Inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks in MADIT II: frequency, mechanisms, predictors, and survival impact. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008, 51: 1357–1365.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sweeney MO, Wathen MS, Volosin K, et al.: Appropriate and inappropriate ventricular therapies, quality of life, and mortality among primary and secondary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients: results from the Pacing Fast VT R Educes Shock ThErapies (PainFREE Rx II) trial. Circulation 2005, 111: 2898–2905.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Anselme F, Mletzko R, Bowes R, et al.: Prevention of inappropriate shocks in ICD recipients: a review of 10,000 tachycardia episodes. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007, 30(Suppl 1): S128–S133.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pedersen SS, Van Den Broek KC, Sears SF: Psychological intervention following implantation of an implantable defibrillator: a review and future recommendations. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007, 30: 1546–1554.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kuhl EA, Dixit NK, Walker RL, et al.: Measurement of patient fears about implantable cardioverter defibrillator shock: an initial evaluation of the Florida Shock Anxiety Scale. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2006, 29: 614–618.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Urizar GG Jr, Sears SF Jr, Handberg E, Conti JB: Psychosocial intervention for a geriatric patient to address fears related to implantable cardioverter defibrillator discharges. Psychosomatics 2004, 45: 140–144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sears SE Jr, Conti JB: Understanding implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks and storms: medical and psychosocial considerations for research and clinical care. Clin Cardiol 2003, 26: 107–111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sears SF, Lewis TS, Kuhl EA, Conti JB: Predictors of quality of life in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Psychosomatics 2005, 46: 451–457.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Korte T, Koditz H, Niehaus M, et al.: High incidence of appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapies in children and adolescents with implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2004, 27: 924–932.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Swerdlow CD, Chen PS, Kass RM, et al.: Discrimination of ventricular tachycardia from sinus tachycardia and atrial fibrillation in a tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillator. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994, 23: 1342–1355.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Boriani G, Biffi M, Dall’Acqua A, et al.: Rhythm discrimination by rate branch and QRS morphology in dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2003, 26: 466–470.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gronefeld GC, Schulte B, Hohnloser SH, et al.: Morphology discrimination: a beat-to-beat algorithm for the discrimination of ventricular from supraventricular tachycardia by implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2001, 24: 1519–1524.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Klein GJ, Gillberg JM Tang A, et al.: Improving SVT discrimination in single-chamber ICDs: a new electrogram morphology-based algorithm. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2006, 17: 1310–1319.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gold MR, Hsu W, Marcovecchio AF, et al.: A new defibrillator discrimination algorithm utilizing electrogram morphology analysis. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1999, 22: 179–182.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gold MR, Shorofsky SR, Thompson JA, et al.: Advanced rhythm discrimination for implantable cardioverter defibrillators using electrogram vector timing and correlation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2002, 13: 1092–1097.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Aliot E, Nitzsche R, Ripart A: Arrhythmia detection by dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators. A review of current algorithms. Europace 2004, 6: 273–286.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Friedman PA, McClelland RL, Bamlet WR, et al.: Dual-chamber versus single-chamber detection enhancements for implantable defibrillator rhythm diagnosis: the detect supraventricular tachycardia study. Circulation 2006, 113: 2871–2879.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dorian P, Philippon F, Thibault B, et al.: Randomized controlled study of detection enhancements versus rate-only detection to prevent inappropriate therapy in a dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Heart Rhythm 2004, 1: 540–547.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wilkoff BL, Kuhlkamp V, Volosin K, et al.: Critical analysis of dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator arrhythmia detection: results and technical considerations. Circulation 2001, 103: 381–386.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Nair M, Saoudi N, Kroiss D, et al.: Automatic arrhythmia identification using analysis of the atrioventricular association. Application to a new generation of implantable defibrillators. Participating Centers of the Automatic Recognition of Arrhythmia Study Group. Circulation 1997, 95: 967–973.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Soundarraj D, Thakur RK, Gardiner JC, et al.: Inappropriate ICD therapy: does device configuration make a difference. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2006, 29: 810–815.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Almendral J, Arribas F, Wolpert C, et al., DATAS Steering Committee; DATAS Writing Committee; DATAS Investigators: Dual-chamber defibrillators reduce clinically significant adverse events compared with single-chamber devices: results from the DATAS (Dual chamber and Atrial Tachyarrhythmias Adverse events Study) trial. Europace 2008, 10: 528–535.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gunderson BD, Abeyratne AI, Olson WH, et al.: Effect of programmed number of intervals to detect ventricular fibrillation on implantable cardioverter-defibrillator aborted and unnecessary shocks. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007, 30: 157–165.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wilkoff BL, Stern R, Williamson B, et al.: Design of the Primary Prevention Parameters Evaluation (PREPARE) trial of implantable cardioverter defibrillators to reduce patient morbidity [NCT00279279]. Trials 2006, 7: 18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wathen MS, DeGroot PJ, Sweeney MO, et al., for the PainFree Rx II Investigators: Prospective randomized multicenter trial of empirical antitachycardia pacing versus shocks for spontaneous rapid ventricular tachycardia in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators; pacing fast ventricular tachycardia reduces shock therapies (Pain-Free Rx II) trial results. Circulation 2004, 110: 2591–2596.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wathen M: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator shock reduction using new antitachycardia pacing therapies. Am Heart J 2007, 153: S44–S52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA

    Paul J. Wang

Authors
  1. Ronald Lo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amin Al-Ahmad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Henry Hsia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul C. Zei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Paul J. Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul J. Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lo, R., Al-Ahmad, A., Hsia, H. et al. Optimal programming of ICDs for prevention of appropriate and inappropriate shocks. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 10, 408–416 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-008-0032-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-008-0032-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation