Key result
The chronic upper limit of vulnerability strongly correlates with the chronic defibrillation threshold (r = 0.82, P<0.001), and temporal changes in ULV predict temporal changes in DFT.
Why the study?
Does the upper limit of vulnerability predict the chronic defibrillation threshold in patients with transvenous implantable defibrillators?
Observational (n=40)
Does the upper limit of vulnerability predict the chronic defibrillation threshold in patients with transvenous implantable defibrillators?
Effect estimate: r = 0.82
p-value: p=<0.001
Temporal changes in the upper limit of vulnerability predict temporal changes in the defibrillation threshold, and a 3 J safety margin above acute ULV is adequate for clinically stable patients.
INTRODUCTION: The upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) is the shock strength at or above which ventricular fibrillation cannot be induced when delivered in the vulnerable period. It correlates acutely with the acute defibrillation threshold (DFT) and can be determined with a single episode of fibrillation. The goal of this prospective study was to determine the relationship between the ULV and the chronic DFT. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 40 patients at, and 3 months after, implantation of transvenous cardioverter defibrillators. The ULV was defined as the weakest biphasic shock that failed to induce fibrillation when delivered 0, 20, and 40 msec before the peak of the T wave. patients were classified as clinically stable or unstable based on prospectively defined criteria. There were no significant differences between the group means for the acute and chronic determinations of ULV (13.5 +/- 5.3 J vs 12.4 +/- 6.8 J, P = 0.25) and DFT (10.1 +/- 5.0 J vs 9.9 +/- 5.7 J, P = 0.74). Five patients (15%) were classified as unstable. The strength of the correlation between acute ULV and acute DFT (r = 0.74, P < 0.001) was similar to that between the chronic ULV and chronic DFT (r = 0.82, P < 0.001). There was a correlation between the change in ULV from acute to chronic and the corresponding change in DFT (r = 0.67, P < 0.001). The chronic DFT was less than the acute ULV +3 J in all 35 stable patients, but it was greater in 2 of 5 unstable patients (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The strength of the correlation between the chronic ULV and the chronic DFT is comparable to that between the acute ULV and the acute DFT. Temporal changes in the ULV predict temporal changes in the DFT. In clinically stable patients, a defibrillation safety margin of 3 J above the acute ULV proved an adequate chronic safety margin.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Martín et al. (1997) conducted an observational in Implantation of transvenous cardioverter defibrillators (n=40). Upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) was evaluated on Correlation between chronic ULV and chronic defibrillation threshold (DFT) (r = 0.82, p=<0.001). The chronic upper limit of vulnerability strongly correlates with the chronic defibrillation threshold (r = 0.82, P<0.001), and temporal changes in ULV predict temporal changes in DFT.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: