Premium
Comparison of a Porous‐Surfaced with a Totally Porous Ventricular Endocardial Pacing Electrode
Author(s) -
BOBYN J. DENNIS,
WILSON GREGORY J.,
MYCYK TARAS R.,
KLEMENT PETER,
TAIT GORDON A.,
PILLIAR ROBERT M.,
MacGREGOR DAVID C.
Publication year - 1981
Publication title -
pacing and clinical electrophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.686
H-Index - 101
eISSN - 1540-8159
pISSN - 0147-8389
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1981.tb03721.x
Subject(s) - electrode , porosity , pulse (music) , biomedical engineering , materials science , medicine , electrical impedance , electrophysiology , composite material , voltage , electrical engineering , physics , quantum mechanics , engineering
Porous endocardial ventricular electrodes, re‐cent innovations in cardiac pacing technology, have been shown to perform in a su‐perior manner compared to conventional solid electrodes with respect to such parameters as stimulation threshold, sensed R‐wave amplilude, and source im‐pedance, This experimental study compared the electrophysiological performance of a porous‐surfaced and a totally porous electrode, two fundamental design vari‐ations of the porous eJectrode concept which are in current clinical use. Six porous‐surfaced (1 mm length, 2.3 mm diameter, 8.8 mm 2 outer surface area, pores < 25 μn) and six totally porous (1.3 mm length, 2.0 mm diameter, 7,5 mm‐ outer surface area, pores 100 to 150 μm) flanged ventricular endocardial eleclrodes were implanted into the right ventricular apex of 12 dogs. Stimulation threshoids under constant current and constanl voltage conditions at pulse durations of 0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 milliseconds, sensed peak‐to‐peak R‐wave amplitudes, and source impedance ivere measured at implant and at l, 4, 8, 12,16, 24, and 30 weeks (explant) thereafter. Analyses of voriance on the data for the strength‐durolion curves at expiant and the threshold‐time curves at l ms pulse duration indicated highly significant differ‐ences between the performance of the two types of electrodes, the porous‐surfaced electrodes displaying average Stimulation threshoids approximateiy 30% lower than the totally porous electrodes. Student's t tests indicated the magnitude of the sensed R‐wave to be maintained over the 30 week period for the porous‐surfaced electrodes but to decrease by about 20% for the totally porous electrodes. In addition, the chronic source impedance of the porous‐surfaced electrodes was significtmtly Jess (about 257%) than that of the totally porous electrodes. These differences indi‐cate better overall electrophysiological performance for the porous‐surfaced electrodes as compared with the totally porous electrodes. Both types of electrodes, however, operate well within the limits of highly acceptable function and therefore rep‐resent attractive designs for clinical use in endocardial pacing.