DOI: 10.12890/2024_004526
Catastrophic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator misclassification of ventricular tachycardia
Authors
zhafranveliawan92@gmail.com
Keywords
Morphology discrimination, supraventricular tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia, ICD misclassificationAbstract
Inappropriate therapy is a frequent adverse consequence of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Inappropriate therapy often occurs due to the misinterpretation of sinus tachycardia or atrial fibrillation/flutter with rapid atrioventricular conduction by the device. Current implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) mechanisms integrate various discriminators into algorithms to differentiate supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) from ventricular tachycardia (VT), to prevent such occurrences. A 40-year-old man suffered seizures and cardiac arrest abruptly, without prior complaints of chest pain. Without delay, he initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), resulting in the regaining of spontaneous circulation. The patient had previously received a single-chamber ICD due to recurring VT and a prior episode of cardiac arrest. The patient had a medical background of coronary artery disease with complete revascularisation and no previous occurrence of SVT. Interrogating the ICD revealed captured non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) and SVT events but no VT episode or shock therapy. During the specified time period, the patient underwent an electrophysiological study, and no SVT was induced with the normal function of the atrioventricular and sinoatrial nodes. Various causes can lead to errors in morphology discrimination criteria in single-chamber ICDs. Extending the detection interval is highly recommended to avoid misclassification of ICDs.
References
- van Rees JB, Borleffs CJ, de Bie MK, Stijnen T, van Erven L, Bax JJ, et al. Inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks: incidence, predictors, and impact on mortality. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;57:556–562.
- Mukherjee RK, Sohal M, Shanmugam N, Pearse S, Jouhra F. Successful identification of and discrimination between atrial and ventricular arrhythmia with the aid of pacing and defibrillator devices. Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev 2021;10:235–240.
- Madhavan M, Friedman PA. Optimal programming of implantable cardiac-defibrillators. Circulation 2013;128:659–672.
- Toquero J, Alzueta J, Mont L, Lozano IF, Barrera A, Berruezo A, et al. Morphology discrimination criterion wavelet improves rhythm discrimination in single-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: Spanish Register of morphology discrimination criterion wavelet (REMEDIO). Europace 2009;11:727–733
- Kossaify A. Sensing and detection functions in implantable cardioverter defibrillators: the good, the bad and the ugly. Acta Cardiol Sin 2020;36:308–317.
- Frontera A, Strik M, Eschalier R, Biffi M, Pereira B, Welte N, et al. Electrogram morphology discriminators in implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a comparative evaluation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2020;31:1493–1506
- Ananwattanasuk T, Tanawuttiwat T, Chokesuwattanaskul R, Lathkar-Pradhan S, Barham W, Oral H, et al. Programming implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in primary prevention: guideline concordance and outcomes. Heart Rhythm 2020;17:1101–1106
- Daubert JP, Zareba W, Cannom DS, McNitt S, Rosero SZ, Wang P, et al. Inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks in MADIT II: frequency, mechanisms, predictors, and survival impact. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:1357–1365.
- Brüggemann T, Dahlke D, Chebbo A, Neumann I. Tachycardia detection in modern implantable cardioverter-defibrillators Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol 2016;27:171–185.
- Theuns DAMJ, Rivero-Ayerza M, Goedhart DM, Miltenburg M, Jordaens LJ. Morphology discrimination in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: consistency of template match percentage during atrial tachyarrhythmias at different heart rates. Europace 2008;10:1060–1066
