Premium
Transseptal Defibrillation Is Superior for Transvenous Defibrillation
Author(s) -
SINGER IGOR,
GOLDSMITH JANE,
MALDONADO CLAUDIO
Publication year - 1995
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.1540-8159.1995.tb02510.x
Subject(s) - defibrillation , medicine , electrode , cardiology , defibrillation threshold , shock (circulatory) , anode , chemistry
The conventional electrode configuration of current internal defibrillation systems most commonly use superior vena caval (SVC) or combined SVC and subcutaneous (SC) electrodes as anode, and right ventricular apex (HVA) electrode as cathode. We have demonstrated earlier that the septal mass is important for defibrillation. The purpose of the present study was to compare a transseptal to a conventional electrode arrangement in the canine model. Three endocardial electrodes, 5 French EnGuard™ were positioned in RVA, SVC, and the right ventricular outflow (RVO) in eight dogs. A 5 French SC electrode was positioned in the fifth left intercostal space. RVA‐RVO ‐ /SC + (configuration 2) was compared to SVC‐SC + /RVA ‐ (configuration 1). Defibrillation threshold testing was performed using asymmetrical biphasic shock, 6 msec + /2 msec ‐ . Probit fit was used to compare the results at 40%, 50%, 60%, and 90% probabilities, and the logistic regression analysis to estimate the impact of variables. Electrode configuration had the strongest predictive value. Configuration 2 was superior to configuration 1 (P = 0.0016). At any voltage settings the probability of success for configuration 2 was greater, and current less (P < 0.00005). The energy requirements were reduced by approximately 33% for configuration 2. There were no significant differences in impedance between the two configurations. We conclude that transseptal defibrillation is more effective because of the improved lead geometry and voltage gradient.