This case highlights that normal pacing parameters and impedance do not rule out an ICD lead fracture if the pacing electrodes are separate from the damaged defibrillation coil.
Lead fracture may cause oversensing despite normal parameters; leaves open questions on optimal device monitoring strategies.
A 63-year-old lady with a high-grade atrioventricular (AV) block and a structurally normal heart underwent permanent pacemaker implantation (dual chamber, Medtronic Ltd) 8 years back. On follow up, she had a recurrence of syncope after 3 years. The device interrogation at that time had revealed ventricular tachycardia (VT) for which she underwent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD, Medtronic Ltd, Egida DR, DF1) upgradation at another center (electrograms not available). Now, she presents with episodes of presyncope after another 5 years. The Echocardiography was unremarkable. The ICD was interrogated & there was a stored ventricular fibrillation (VF) episode. But the electrograms suggested noise over a true VF electrogram noted in both near and far-field. In all probability, the VF was not a true one which might have arisen from some lead noise or from an electromagnetic interference (EMI). Fluoroscopy revealed an evident lead fracture near the superior vena cava (SVC) coil. The stored electrogram (EGM) characteristics also suggested possible lead noise rather than a true VF. She was advised for lead revision. Interestingly, all pacing parameters were normal along with normal impedance despite the evident lead fracture. This happened due to the ICD lead arrangements as there are separate electrodes for the SVC/RV coil and pacing. While the SVC coil was damaged, the pacing electrodes remained unaffected. Since the patient has no episode of true VT/NSVT and the echocardiography was normal, she was managed temporarily by changing the pacemaker to asynchronous (DOO) mode.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Halder et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: