Key result
Coronary sinus lead cuts atrial defibrillation threshold ~28% vs. conventional right ventricular pathway.
Why the study?
Previous studies demonstrated significant failure in converting atrial fibrillation using a conventional ventricular pathway, motivating assessment of coronary sinus lead incorporation to reduce atrial defibrillation threshold.
RCT (n=18)
Randomized
Absolute Event Rate: 11.8% vs 16.5%
p-value: p=0.021
May support coronary sinus lead evaluation for atrial defibrillation; leaves open outcome benefits in randomized trials.
INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have demonstrated significant failure in converting atrial fibrillation (AF) using a conventional ventricular pathway. The aim of this study was to assess the benefit of incorporating a coronary sinus (CS) lead into the atrial defibrillation pathway in atrial defibrillation threshold (ADFT) reduction in patients with persistent AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study was a prospective, randomized assessment of shock configuration on ADFT in 18 patients undergoing elective internal cardioversion for persistent AF (mean AF duration: 8 +/- 9 months). The lead system included a dual-coil defibrillation lead (Endotak DSP, Guidant) with a distal right ventricular (RV) electrode and a proximal superior vena cava (SVC) electrode, a CS lead (Perimeter, Guidant), and a left pectoral cutaneous electrode (Can). In each patient, dual step-up ADFTs were determined for each of three vectors: (1) RV --> SVC+Can; (2) CS --> SVC+Can; and (3) RV --> CS+SVC+Can (group 1, n = 8) or RV+CS --> SVC+Can (group 2, n = 10), using R wave-synchronized biphasic shocks. Successful defibrillation was achieved in all patients without any ventricular proarrhythmia. ADFT of CS --> SVC+Can (11.8 +/- 5.6 J) was significantly lower than ADFT of RV --> SVC+Can (16.5 +/- 7.8 J, P = 0.021). ADFT of CS --> SVC+Can was similar to RV --> CS+SVC+Can (group 1: 12.0 +/- 6.5 J vs 17.4 +/- 4.8 J, P = 0.16), but it was significantly higher than RV+CS --> SVC+Can (group 2: 9.0 +/- 3.9 J vs 11.6 +/- 5.0 J, P = 0.049). CONCLUSION: Patients with persistent AF of substantial duration can be reliably cardioverted using a conventional implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) lead set; however, the incorporation of a CS lead to the conventional ICD lead configuration significantly lowered ADFT. The optimal shock vector that incorporates a CS lead for atrial defibrillation requires future studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tse et al. (2003) conducted an RCT in Persistent atrial fibrillation (n=18). Coronary sinus (CS) lead incorporation into the atrial defibrillation pathway vs. Conventional right ventricular (RV) pathway was evaluated on Atrial defibrillation threshold (ADFT) (p=0.021). Incorporating a coronary sinus lead significantly lowered the atrial defibrillation threshold compared to a conventional right ventricular pathway (11.8 J vs 16.5 J, P=0.021).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: