+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      ICD restudy: results and potential benefit from routine predischarge and 2-month evaluation.

      Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

      Retrospective Studies, Aged, Defibrillators, Implantable, adverse effects, Electrophysiology, Equipment Failure, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome Assessment (Health Care), Reoperation

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Evaluation of ICD function can now be performed noninvasively with intravenous sedation. To determine the value of follow-up electrophysiological studies for ICD implants, we performed a retrospective review of predischarge and 2-month ICD re studies, identifying critical problems uncovered. Of the 123 patients implanted, 122 had a predischarge study, 105 had both predischarge and elective 2-month follow-up studies, and 1 patient expired prior to restudy. Patients who underwent 2-month studies for nonelective indications (e.g., frequent shocks) were excluded from analysis. Programming changes were made in 62% of the predischarge studies (n = 122) and 70% of the elective 2-month studies (n = 105). The average number of programming changes per study was 1.3 for predischarge testing and 1.1 for 2-month testing. The most common changes at predischarge testing were adjustment of the tachyarrhythmia rate cutoff (35%) and at 2-month study, reprogramming of bradycardia pacing parameters (41%). Of the patients who underwent both predischarge and 2-month testing, 91% had programming changes in at least one of their re studies. Of 227 re studies performed, 18 studies in 14 patients yielded 24 critical findings which included: DFT increases to > or = 25 J (n = 13); sensing abnormalities of induced ventricular arrhythmia (n = 6); dislodged lead (n = 2); and serious pacemaker interactions (n = 3). Six of these critical cases (5% of total patients) required reoperation. The data suggests that routine ICD restudy is a valuable tool for management of the ICD patient. Additionally, ICD restudy is likely to increase the diagnostic yield of clinically silent critical system problems that could result in device failure.

          Related collections

          Author and article information



          Comment on this article