Skip to main content
Log in

Frequent ICD Shocks due to Double Sensing in Patients with Bi-Ventricular Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biventricular pacing has emerged as a modality for treatment of patients with heart failure. Combined biventricular pacers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators offer treatment of heart failure as well as protection from sudden cardiac death. However, inappropriate ICD shocks as a result of double sensing due to widely spaced ventricular bipoles may pose a significant problem in these patients.

We examined the ICD records of twenty-three patients with biventricular ICDs, and evaluated all episodes of double sensing that resulted in aborted or delivered therapy.

In follow-up of 3.7 ± 2.6 months, thirty-three shocks in fifteen episodes occurred in five patients (21.7%) due to double sensing. Four patients (17.4%) had aborted shocks due to double sensing. All episodes resulting in shock occurred because of sinus tachycardia or supraventricular tachycardia above the upper programmed pacing rate of the device with resultant AV conduction and double sensing of the nonpaced ventricular depolarization.

In conclusion, double sensing of the R-wave is a common and clinically important cause of inappropriate ICD detection and shock in patients with biventricular ICDs. Appropriate programming of the ICD can prevent episodes of inappropriate shocks.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Conraads V, Vrints C. Biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;345(4):293–294.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bakker PF, et al. Biventricular pacing in end-stage heart failure improves functional capacity and left ventricular function. Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology 2000;4(2):395–404.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Braunschweig F, et al. Reduction of hospital days by biventricular pacing. European Journal of Heart Failure 2000;2(4):399–406.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cazeau S, et al. Effects of multisite biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and intraventricular conduction delay. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;344(12):873–880.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Debrunner M, Naegeli B, Bertel O. The acute effects of transvenous biventricular pacing in a patient with congestive heart failure. Chest 2000;117(6):1798–1800.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lau CP, et al. Reversal of left ventricular remodeling by synchronous biventricular pacing in heart failure. Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology 2000;23(11 Pt 2):1722–1725.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Leclercq C, et al. Acute hemodynamic effects of biventricular DDD pacing in patients with end-stage heart failure. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 1998;32(7):1825–1831.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Stellbrink C, et al. Potential benefit of biventricular pacing in patients with congestive heart failure and ventricular tachyarrhythmia. American Journal of Cardiology 1999;83(5B):143D–150D.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Buxton AE, et al. A randomized study of the prevention of sudden death in patients with coronary artery disease. New England Journal of Medicine 1999;341(25):1882–1890.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Moss AJ, et al. Improved survival with an implanted defibrillator in patients with coronary disease at high risk for ventricular arrhythmia. New England Journal of Medicine 1996;335(26):1933–1940.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Moss AJ, et al. Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction. New England Journal of Medicine 2002;346(12):877–883.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Liu BC, et al. Inappropriate shock delivery and biventricular pacing cardiac defibrillators. Tex Heart Inst J 2003;30(1):45–49.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Betts TR, et al. Inappropriate shock therapy in a heart failure defibrillator. Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology 2001;24(2):238–240.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gaita F, et al. Should stimulation therapy for congestive heart failure be combined with defibrillation backup? The American Journal of Cardiology 2000;86(1):K165–K168.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bocchiardo M, et al. Efficacy of biventricular sensing and treatment of ventricular arrhythmias. Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology 2000;23(11 Pt. 2):1989–1991.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kanagaratnam L, et al. Matching approved “nondedicated” hardware to obtain biventricular pacing and defibrillation: Feasibility and troubleshooting. PACE 2002;25(7):1066–1071.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kuhlkamp V and The InSync ICD World Wide Investigators. Initial experience with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator incorporating cardiac resynchronization therapy. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2002;39(5):790–797.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amin Al-Ahmad.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Al-Ahmad, A., Wang, P.J., Homoud, M.K. et al. Frequent ICD Shocks due to Double Sensing in Patients with Bi-Ventricular Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 9, 377–381 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1027455713120

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1027455713120

Navigation