Key result
The Ventak AV demonstrated equivalent ventricular fibrillation detection time compared to the Ventak Mini (2.0 vs 1.8 seconds; P=0.26) in the presence of high rate dual chamber pacing.
Why the study?
Does the Ventak AV with dual chamber pacing maintain equivalent ventricular fibrillation detection time compared to the Ventak Mini in patients receiving an implantable defibrillator?
RCT (n=33)
1:1
Does the Ventak AV with dual chamber pacing maintain equivalent ventricular fibrillation detection time compared to the Ventak Mini in patients receiving an implantable defibrillator?
Absolute Event Rate: 2% vs 1.8%
p-value: p=0.26
The Ventak AV dual-chamber ICD demonstrates equivalent ventricular fibrillation detection time compared to a single-chamber device, even during high-rate pacing.
Supports dual-chamber ICD use for atrial pacing needs; confirms VF detection safety during high-rate pacing in this RCT.
The Ventak AV is an implantable cardioverter defibrillator with dual chamber pacing capability. Features include detection and treatment of ventricular arrhythmias, detection of atrial arrhythmias, as well as dual chamber pacing. The objective of the investigation was to verify the efficacy of the Ventak AV in detecting ventricular fibrillation in the presence of dual chamber pacing. Thirty-three patients, who were to receive an implantable defibrillator were randomized (1:1) in a paired comparison study to the Ventak AV (study device) and the Ventak Mini (control) during defibrillation threshold testing. In order to create a "worst case scenario" for sensing of ventricular fibrillation, pacing was performed at high lower rate limit values (Ventak AV DDD pacing at 150/min, Ventak Mini at VVI 100/min). Ventricularfibrillation was induced and the randomized device was allowed to detect and treat the arrhythmia. This test was repeated for each patient using the alternate device in a randomized order, such that all patients were tested with both devices. The mean ventricular fibrillation detection time for the Ventak AV was 2.0+/-0.11 seconds and for the control device the detection time was 1.8+/-0.11 seconds (P = 0.26). Appropriate tachyarrhythmia therapy decision was documented in all episodes for both devices. The study patient population demonstrated equivalent ventricular fibrillation detection time between the Ventak AV and the Ventak Mini. The Ventak AV demonstrated effectiveness in detecting ventricular fibrillation in the presence of high rate dual chamber pacing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kühlkamp et al. (1999) conducted an RCT in Implantable defibrillator indication (n=33). Ventak AV vs. Ventak Mini was evaluated on Ventricular fibrillation detection time (p=0.26). The Ventak AV demonstrated equivalent ventricular fibrillation detection time compared to the Ventak Mini (2.0 vs 1.8 seconds; P=0.26) in the presence of high rate dual chamber pacing.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: