Why the study?
Does shock coil interaction increase the incidence of inappropriate therapies and lead failure in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators?
Does shock coil interaction increase the incidence of inappropriate therapies and lead failure in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In patients with multiple ICD leads, shock coil interaction is associated with a significantly higher risk of inappropriate therapies and the need for lead revision.
AIMS: Shock coil interaction in patients with multiple implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads is occasionally observed. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of shock coil interaction and its clinical relevance. METHODS AND RESULTS: All ICD patients (646 patients) who came to follow up control in our ICD ambulance between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2011 in the department of cardiology in Bad Berka hospital were retrospectively evaluated in this study. All baseline demographic, clinical, and procedural characteristics and postoperative chest x ray in postero-anterior and lateral view as well as clinical and ICD follow up data were evaluated. Among 646 patients 42 had multiple ICD leads (6.5%) of whom 36 patients (5.5% of total cohort patients and 85.7% of patients with multiple ICD leads) had shock coil interaction and presented the study group (Group I). The control group (Group II) consisted of 610 patients without coil-coil interaction including patients with single shock lead (604 patients) or patients with multiple leads but without interaction between shock coils (6 patients). Inappropriate anti-tachycardia therapies and RV lead revisions were more frequent in patients with interaction between shock coils (Group I vs Group II: 27.7% and 5.7%; p = 0.049 and 30.6% vs 6.4; p = 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Interaction between shock coils may be one of possible causes of lead failure and resulted in inappropriate therapies and subsequent lead revision.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garhy et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: