Key result
S-ICD shocks (80-J) caused significantly less cardiac injury than 35-J transvenous shocks (4-hour Troponin I 0.12 vs 22.6 ng/mL), despite causing more skeletal muscle injury.
Why the study?
Does S-ICD with 80-J shocks cause more cardiac and chest wall damage compared to transvenous ICD with 35-J shocks in a swine model?
Does S-ICD with 80-J shocks cause more cardiac and chest wall damage compared to transvenous ICD with 35-J shocks in a swine model?
In a swine model, 80-J shocks from an S-ICD caused significantly less cardiac injury (measured by Troponin I) than 35-J shocks from a transvenous ICD, despite causing more skeletal muscle injury.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
High-energy S-ICD shocks caused minimal damage in swine; leaves open translation to human safety and practice.
Killingsworth et al. (2013) studied Acute Cardiac and Chest Wall Damage (n=8). Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) vs. Transvenous ICD with five 35-Joule shocks was evaluated on Cardiac and chest wall damage assessed by Troponin I, CK-MM, and histopathological scoring. S-ICD shocks (80-J) caused significantly less cardiac injury than 35-J transvenous shocks (4-hour Troponin I 0.12 vs 22.6 ng/mL), despite causing more skeletal muscle injury.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: