Key result
Commanded low-energy internal cardioversion of 0.6 J successfully treated ventricular tachycardia in a patient refractory to high-energy ICD shocks.
Why the study?
Does commanded low-energy internal cardioversion successfully treat ventricular tachycardia refractory to high-energy shocks?
Case Report (n=1)
Does commanded low-energy internal cardioversion successfully treat ventricular tachycardia refractory to high-energy shocks?
Low-energy internal cardioversion may be an effective rescue strategy for ventricular tachycardia refractory to standard high-energy ICD shocks.
May offer rescue in refractory VT; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before any practice change.
Herein we report the case of a patient who was admitted in ventricular tachycardia after having received multiple ineffective (and sometimes pro-arrhythmic) high-energy internal shocks from his ICD and who was finally successfully treated by a commanded low-energy internal cardioversion of 0.6 J. This article revisits the use of low-energy shocks and discusses their electrophysiogical mechanisms and clinical implications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Burri et al. (2017) conducted a case report in Ventricular tachycardia (n=1). Low-energy internal cardioversion vs. High-energy internal shocks was evaluated on Successful treatment of ventricular tachycardia. Commanded low-energy internal cardioversion of 0.6 J successfully treated ventricular tachycardia in a patient refractory to high-energy ICD shocks.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: