The simultaneous use of a biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) unit: implications for device interaction

Risk of occurrence of electromagnetic interference from the application of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on the sensing function of implantable defibrillators

BACKGROUND

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an established method for pain relief. But electrical TENS currents are also a source of electromagnetic interference (EMI). Thus, TENS is considered to be contraindicated in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients. However, data might be outdated due to considerable advances in ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) filtering and noise protection algorithm technologies. The aim of this pilot safety study was to re-evaluate the safety of TENS in patients with modern ICDs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

One hundred and seven patients equipped with 55 different models of ICD/CRT with defibrillators from 4 manufacturers underwent a standardized test protocol including TENS at the cervical spine and the thorax, at 2 stimulation modes-high-frequency TENS (80 Hz) and burst-mode TENS (2 Hz). Potential interference monitoring included continuous documentation of ECG Lead II, intracardiac electrograms and the marker channel. Electromagnetic interference was detected in 17 of 107 patients (15.9%). Most frequent were: interpretations as a premature ventricular beats (VS/S) in 15 patients (14%), noise reversion in 5 (4.6%) which resulted in temporary asynchronous pacing in 3 (2.8%), interpretation as ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in 2 (1.9%), and premature atrial beat in 2 (1.9%) patients. Electromagnetic interference occurrence was influenced by position (chest, P < 0.01), higher current intensity (P < 0.01), and manufacturer (P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Overall, only intermittent and minor EMI were detected. Prior to the use of TENS in patients with ICDs, they should undergo testing under the supervision of a cardiac device specialist.

Comprehensive multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC; Secondary prevention and rehabilitation section) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary intervention including patient assessment and medical actions to promote stabilization, management of cardiovascular risk factors, vocational support, psychosocial management, physical activity counselling, and prescription of exercise training. Millions of people with cardiac implantable electronic devices live in Europe and their numbers are progressively increasing, therefore, large subsets of patients admitted in CR facilities have a cardiac implantable electronic device. Patients who are cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients are considered eligible for a CR programme. This is not only related to the underlying heart disease but also to specific issues, such as psychological adaptation to living with an implanted device and, in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients, the risk of arrhythmia, syncope, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, these patients should receive special attention, as their needs may differ from other patients participating in CR. As evidence from studies of CR in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is sparse, detailed clinical practice guidelines are lacking. Here, we aim to provide practical recommendations for CR in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients in order to increase CR implementation, efficacy, and safety in this subset of patients.

Comprehensive multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC; Secondary prevention and rehabilitation section) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary intervention including patient assessment and medical actions to promote stabilization, management of cardiovascular risk factors, vocational support, psychosocial management, physical activity counselling, and prescription of exercise training. Millions of people with cardiac implantable electronic devices live in Europe and their numbers are progressively increasing, therefore, large subsets of patients admitted in CR facilities have a cardiac implantable electronic device. Patients who are cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients are considered eligible for a CR programme. This is not only related to the underlying heart disease but also to specific issues, such as psychological adaptation to living with an implanted device and, in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients, the risk of arrhythmia, syncope, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, these patients should receive special attention, as their needs may differ from other patients participating in CR. As evidence from studies of CR in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is sparse, detailed clinical practice guidelines are lacking. Here, we aim to provide practical recommendations for CR in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients in order to increase CR implementation, efficacy, and safety in this subset of patients.

[Cardiac implantable electronic devices : Electromagnetic interference from electrocauterization, lithotripsy and physiotherapy]

The management of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) poses a particular challenge in the peri-interventional and perioperative medical environment due to the many forms of possible electromagnetic interference. Although the devices encountered nowadays are of increasing complexity, the vast majority of procedures can be safely performed in patients. The existing position statements and recommendations, however, have a low level of evidence and are often contradictory. In the context of intraoperative electrocauterization, one of the most important sources of electromagnetic interference in the medical environment, recent studies have suggested an increasingly pragmatically perioperative CIED management, which is not represented in the existing recommendations. This article gives an example of these newer findings and reports the currently used and appropriately adapted perioperative CIED management protocol. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy was thought to cause severe interference in CIED patients based on older studies and in vitro experiments. Although electromagnetic interference is possible, clinical observations with modern devices show that the procedure can generally be safely applied in CIED patients. Physiotherapy often utilizes a variety of electromechanical devices, which can be a relevant source of electromagnetic interference. Although some of these therapies can be safely used, coordination with the responsible CIED unit is recommended.

Influence of electrical stimulation therapy on permanent pacemaker function

BACKGROUND

Electrical stimulation therapy (EST) and transcutaneous electrical neuromuscular stimulation (TENS), a modality of EST, have become widely applied, accepted and effective methods for the treatment of musculoskeletal and other pain conditions. According to the rising number of permanent pacemaker (PM) wearers the number of potential candidates for EST with concomitant device implantation is growing. Contradictory recommendations exist regarding the application of EST or TENS on PM wearers.

AIM

The study was carried out to evaluate the impact of EST on PM function.

METHODS

A full size model mimicking the electrical characteristics of the human body was used to evaluate the application of EST on permanent PM devices. Various configurations with respect to energy modality, position of the stimulation electrodes and PM device models were evaluated. Intracardiac PM electrogram tracings (iEGM) were analyzed for the interference of EST with PM function.

RESULTS

Unilateral EST application did not cause interference with PM function in any of the configurations (0%; n = 700). On the contrary, bilateral stimulation (350 configurations in total) caused either ventricular inhibition or switch to V00 back-up pacing due to electrical interference in 165 cases (47.1%) depending on the applied stimulation parameters.

CONCLUSION

The use of EST potentially interferes with PM therapy, especially if the electrodes are positioned bilaterally; however, unilateral EST application appeared to be safe in all tested configurations.

Electrical Interaction between Implantable Vagus Nerve Stimulation Device and Implantable Cardiac Rhythm Management Device

BACKGROUND

Autonomic regulation therapy via vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) was recently approved as a therapy for chronic heart failure, and will likely be utilized in patients who are also indicated for cardiac rhythm management device implantation. This study is designed to assess the degree to which VNS is likely to cause interference in the cardiac sensing of an implantable cardiac rhythm management device.

METHODS

A VNS stimulation lead and a cardiac sensing lead were placed in a simulated biological medium. A nonconductive carrier frame was used to position the leads at a precise electrode spacing. Stimulation was delivered through the VNS Therapy lead at a maximum output current and a variety of combinations of stimulation frequencies from 5-30 Hz and stimulation pulse widths from 130-1000 μs. The electrode spacing began at 0 cm and was increased in 1 cm increments until the measured signal dropped below the cardiac rhythm management device noise floor for sensing. The test was conducted with both bipolar and unipolar sensing.

RESULTS

In the bipolar sensing configuration, the maximum sensed signal amplitude was 687 μV at an electrode separation of 0 cm, signal frequency of 30 Hz, pulse width of 1000 μs, and output current of 3.5 mA. In the unipolar sensing configuration, the maximum amplitude was 406 μV. In both configurations, the measured signal with maximum stimulation intensity decreased significantly with electrode separation, and dropped below the noise floor at an electrode spacing of 3.0 cm. The sensed signal amplitude was further attenuated at lower stimulation amplitudes and pulse widths.

CONCLUSION

Even at maximum neural stimulation intensity of 3.5 mA, at an electrode separation of at least 3.0 cm, neural stimulation did not result in a detectable level of interference with either bipolar or unipolar sensing. Because this separation is significantly smaller than the minimum electrode separation of 15 cm in clinical practice, VNS Therapy is not expected to interfere with the function of implantable cardiac devices.

Tumor Treating Fields Utilization in a Glioblastoma Patient with a Preexisting Cardiac Pacemaker: The First Reported Case

BACKGROUND

Tumor-treating fields (TTFs) have become an important, evidence-based modality in the treatment of glioblastoma (GBM). In patients requiring cardiac pacemakers, TTF therapy is complicated by theoretical concerns regarding possible electrical interaction between the devices.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 57-year-old man with past medical history of sick sinus syndrome requiring cardiac pacemaker implantation suffered an acute neurologic change associated with a left parieto-occipital lesion, which was found to be GBM. After completion of guideline-concordant chemoradiation, he chose to undergo TTF therapy. Because of the absence of cardiac symptoms and the theoretical risk of far-field sensing by the pacemaker of the TTF device (potentially resulting in pacemaker inhibition), the pacemaker was turned off before receiving TTF. Following TTF implementation, the patient responded well; he remains alive more than 25 months following his GBM diagnosis, exceeding the median 20.9-month survival of the recently completed phase III TTF randomized clinical trial for newly diagnosed GBM. Furthermore, he has exhibited neither cardiac morbidity nor adverse scalp reactions to TTF therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The first reported case of successful TTF administration in a GBM patient with a previously implanted cardiac pacemaker may allay the concerns of neuro-oncologists, cardiologists, radiation oncologists, and all certified TTF prescribers regarding the applicability of TTF in suitable candidates with preexisting cardiac pacemakers. This case indicates that TTF therapy may be efficacious in patients with indwelling magnetic resonance image-conditional cardiac pacemakers turned to the off position and that physical removal of the pacemaker is not necessary before starting TTF.

Cautery selection for oculofacial plastic surgery in patients with implantable electronic devices

PURPOSE

To discover oculofacial plastic surgeon practice patterns for cautery selection in the setting of implantable electronic devices and present guidelines based on a review of current literature.

METHODS

A 10-Question web-based survey was sent to the email list serve of the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery to determine surgeon cautery preference in the setting of various implantable electronic devices and comfort level with the guidelines for cautery selection in their practice or institution. The relationship between survey questions was assessed for statistical significance using Pearson's Chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-three (41% response rate) surveys were completed and included for analysis. Greater than half of respondents either had no policy (36%) or were unaware of a policy (19%) in their practice or institution regarding cautery selection in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device. Bipolar cautery was favored for use in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (79%-80%) and this number dropped in patients with implantable neurostimulators (30%). Overall, one-third of respondents did not feel comfortable with their practice/institution policy.

CONCLUSION

Choices and comfort level among oculofacial plastic surgeons for cautery selection in patients with implantable electronic devices vary considerably, and some choices may increase the risk for interference-related complications. Practice patterns vary significantly in the setting of a neurostimulator or cochlear implant, where interference can cause thermal injury to the brain and implant damage, respectively. Guidelines are proposed for cautery selection in patients with implantable electronic devices undergoing oculofacial plastic surgery.

The safety of electrical stimulation in patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators: A systematic review

Introduction

A number of patients are excluded from electrical stimulation treatment because there is concern that electrical stimulation could cause electromagnetic interference with pacemakers and implanted cardioverter defibrillators. The decision to use electrical stimulation in these patients needs to be supported by an assessment of benefit and harm.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of the risk of electromagnetic interference between electrical stimulation and pacemakers or implanted cardioverter defibrillators. We included the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE in the time period between 1966 and 26 August 2016.

Results

18 papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria (eight safety studies and ten case studies). Although we were unable to accurately estimate the risk of electromagnetic interference, the studies revealed that patients having electrical stimulation of the lower limb are less susceptible to electromagnetic interference.

Conclusions

The results suggest that electrical stimulation could be used safely to help drop foot in patients with pacemakers or implanted cardioverter defibrillators. However, in order to obtain an accurate estimate of the risk of electromagnetic interference, a large, long-term, and intervention-specific safety study is required. Until such a study is undertaken, electrical stimulation should be used with caution in patients with pacemakers and implanted cardioverter defibrillators.

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation of the thighs in cardiac patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators

Background

The aim of this systematic review was to update scientific knowledge concerning the safety of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) to increase exercise capacity and prevent cardiac cachexia in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).

Methods

A systematic review including the electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, and SCOPUS was conducted for the time period from 1966 to March 31, 2016.

Results

Only four articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria (three original articles/safety studies and one case report). The three (safety) studies used NMES to increase muscle strength and/or endurance capacity of the thighs. NMES did not show electromagnetic interference (EMI) with ICD function. EMI was described in a case report of 2 patients with subpectoral ICDs and application of NMES on abdominal muscles.

Conclusion

This review indicates that NMES may be applied in cardiac ICD patients if 1) individual risks (e. g., pacing dependency, acute heart failure, unstable angina, ventricular arrhythmic episode in the last 3 months) are excluded by performing a safety check before starting NMES treatment and 2) “passive” exercise using NMES is performed only for thighs and gluteal muscles in 3) compliant ICD patients (especially for home-based NMES) and 4) the treatment is regularly supervised by a physician and the device is examined after the first use of NMES to exclude EMI. Nevertheless, further studies including larger sample sizes are necessary to exclude any risk when NMES is used in this patient group.

Clinical management of electromagnetic interferences in patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: review of the literature and focus on magnetic resonance conditional devices

The number of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has greatly increased in the last 10 years. Many electronic devices used in daily activities generate electromagnetic interferences (EMIs) that can interact with CIEDs. In clinical practice, it is very important to know the potential sources of EMIs and their effect on CIEDs in order to understand how to manage or mitigate them. A very important source of EMI is magnetic resonance (MR), which is considered nowadays the diagnostic gold standard for different anatomical districts. In this review, we focused on the effects of EMI on CIEDs and on the clinical management. Moreover, we made a clarification about MR and CIEDs.In patients with CIEDs, EMIs may cause potentially serious and even life-threatening complications (inappropriate shocks, device malfunctions, inhibition of pacing in pacemaker-dependent patients) and may rarely dictate device replacement. The association of inappropriate shocks with increased mortality highlights the importance of minimizing the occurrence of EMI. Adequate advice and recommendations about the correct management of EMIs in patients with CIEDs are required to avoid all complications during hospitalization and in daily life. Furthermore, the article focused on actual management about MR and CIEDs.

Effects of external electrical and magnetic fields on pacemakers and defibrillators: from engineering principles to clinical practice

The overall risk of clinically significant adverse events related to EMI in recipients of CIEDs is very low. Therefore, no special precautions are needed when household appliances are used. Environmental and industrial sources of EMI are relatively safe when the exposure time is limited and distance from the CIEDs is maximized. The risk of EMI-induced events is highest within the hospital environment. Physician awareness of the possible interactions and methods to minimize them is warranted.

Electromagnetic interference and implanted cardiac devices: the medical environment (part II)

Electromagnetic interference produced by medical equipment can interact with implanted cardiac devices such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. The most commonly observed interaction is in the operating room with electrosurgery. The risk of interactions can often be mitigated by close communication between the cardiac-device specialist and the anesthesiology/surgical team to develop a patient-specific strategy that accounts for factors such as type of device, type of surgery, and whether the patient is pacemaker dependent. Although magnetic resonance imaging should generally not be used in patients with implanted cardiac devices, several published guidelines provide strategies and recommendations for managing risks if magnetic resonance imaging is required with no suitable diagnostic alternatives. Other common sources of electromagnetic interference in the medical environment are ionizing radiation and left ventricular assist devices.

Conservative treatment for neck pain: medications, physical therapy, and exercise

This article offers conservative treatment strategies for patients suffering from musculoskeletal causes of neck pain. Basic pharmacology is reviewed, including that of opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, adjuvants, and topical analgesics. Moreover, indications for therapeutic exercise, manual therapy, and modalities are reviewed, along with any supporting literature. Treatment considerations with each category of medication and physical therapy are discussed. This article is meant to serve as a resource for physicians to tailor conservative treatment options to their individual patients.

Low-frequency electromyostimulation and chronic heart failure

Low-frequency electromyostimulation (EMS) acts on the skeletal muscle abnormalities that aggravate intolerance to effort in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). It improves the oxidative capacity of muscles and thus enhances aerobic performance and physical capacity to almost the same degree, as does conventional physical training. No local or hemodynamic intolerance has been reported, even in cases of severe CHF. However, the presence of a pacemaker is one of the relative contra-indications (prior evaluation of tolerance is required), while that of an implanted defibrillator is one of the absolute contra-indications. EMS is an alternative to physical effort training when the latter is impossible due to a high degree of deconditioning or because there is a contra-indication, which may be temporary, due to the risk of acute decompensation and/or rhythm troubles. EMS can also be used in patients waiting for a heart transplant or in CHF patients who are unwilling to engage in physical activities. As EMS is not expensive and easy to set up, its use is likely to develop in the future.

Risk of interference from transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on the sensing function of implantable defibrillators

BACKGROUND

The use of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain relief is increasing. At the same time the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is a routine treatment for malignant tachyarrhythmias. Today patients often need devices for more than one condition, and consideration must be given to the interaction between them. We studied the risk of interference between TENS and the ICD function.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty patients who had received an ICD underwent a test protocol including TENS at the mammilla and hip levels, at two energy levels, and at the highest comfortable stimulation level. The effects of TENS on the electrocardiogram lead II, intracardiac electrograms, and the ICD marker channels were analyzed. Disturbance from TENS on the sensing function was seen at all stimulation attempts. Interference between the systems was observed in 16 patients. In eight patients (27%) the interpretation was VT/VF and in 14 patients (47%) as ventricular premature extra beats. Other kinds of interactions were seen in five patients (16%). Each patient could have more than one kind of interference.

CONCLUSIONS

Noise reversion and undersensing might prevent the ICD from delivering shock when it should and the interpretation as VT/VF could result in inappropriate shocks. Because of the potentially serious consequences of interference we do not recommend the use of TENS in patients with ICD.

Effects of electromagnetic interference on implanted cardiac devices and their management

Potential interference between implanted cardiac devices such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and electromagnetic fields is an important concern for physicians taking care of patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. There are many sources of electromagnetic interference (EMI); however, only a small number of these cause significant problems that need attention. Regardless of its source, EMI is of greater concern for a patient who is dependent on paced rhythm because inhibition of the pacemaker by EMI may produce ventricular standstill. It is important that cardiologists, internists, emergency medicine, critical care physicians, and anesthesiologists be aware of how EMI can affect the function of implanted cardiac devices so that appropriate treatment can be rendered and preventive measures instituted.

Management Options for Angina Refractory to Maximal Medical and Surgical Interventions

Despite the seemingly daily advances in the primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention for coronary artery disease, many patients will ultimately experience progression of their disease and experience angina refractory to further active treatment. In these patients, disabling angina occurs at rest or during simple activities of daily living. When this occurs, symptom management, a predominant focus of nursing, becomes the goal of care. Several medical and surgical alternatives are available to patients with refractory angina. Enhanced external counterpulsation and transmyocardial laser revascularization are Food and Drug Administration approved therapies that can be used to attempt to restore the balance of supply and demand. Modulation of sympathetic tone via procedures such as stellate ganglion blocks has also been employed. Other methods to control the pain are techniques that alter pain perception such as spinal opioids, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and spinal cord stimulation. Too few patients with refractory angina are referred for any of these palliative therapies. Armed with knowledge regarding these therapies, nurses will be better prepared to provide anticipatory guidance to patients and their families and to support the patient's hope for relief as they cope with this devastating condition.

Managing noncardiac pain in heart failure patients

Both acute and chronic pain are common coexisting problems in patients with heart failure. Because nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids are contraindicated in heart failure, traditional pain management algorithms require modification. This article reviews pertinent pain management principles, including pain vocabulary, barriers to pain management, and general pain assessment and treatment measures. Issues unique to the heart failure patient are discussed and specific interventions for the heart failure patient with acute or chronic pain are then delineated.

Implantation of bilateral deep brain stimulators in patients with Parkinson disease and preexisting cardiac pacemakers

✓ Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has become an important modality in the treatment of refractory Parkinson disease (PD). In patients with comorbid arrhythmias requiring cardiac pacemakers, DBS therapy is complicated by concerns over a possible electrical interaction between the devices (or with device programming) and the inability to use magnetic resonance imaging guidance for implantation. The authors report two cases of PD in which patients with preexisting cardiac pacemakers underwent successful implantation of bilateral DBS electrodes in the subthalamic nucleus (STN).

Each patient underwent computerized tomography—guided stereotactic frame—based placement of DBS electrodes with microelectrode recording. Both extension wires were passed from the right side of the head and neck (contralateral to the pacemaker) to place the cranial pulse generators subcutaneously in the left and right abdomen. The cranial pulse generators were placed farther than 6 in from the cardiac pacemaker and from each other to decrease the chance of interference between the devices during telemetry reprogramming.

Postoperative management involved brain stimulator programming sessions with simultaneous cardiological monitoring of pacemaker function and cardiac rhythm. No interference was noted at any time, and proper pacemaker function was maintained throughout the follow-up period. With bilateral STN stimulation, both patients experienced a dramatic improvement in their PD symptoms, including elimination of dyskinesias, reduction of “off” severity, and increase of “on” duration.

With some modifications of implantation strategy, two patients with cardiac pacemakers were successfully treated with bilateral DBS STN therapy for refractory PD. To our knowledge, this is the first report on patients with cardiac pacemakers undergoing brain stimulator implantation.

Application of Radiofrequency Energy in Surgical and Interventional Procedures:

During surgical and interventional procedures, interference may occur between ICDs and electrical cautery or with the application of RF energy. This may lead to the false induction of ICD therapies or could even result in device malfunction, which represents a potential perioperative hazard for the patient. This study analyzed the intraoperative interactions in 45 consecutive ICD patients in reference to different surgical and interventional procedures. A total of 33 surgical operations (general surgery [n = 14], urologic [n = 5], abdominal [n = 10], gynecological [n = 2], thoracic [n = 1], neurosurgical [n = 1]) and 12 interventional therapies (RF catheter ablation [n = 10], endoscopic papillotomy [n = 2]) were performed. The ICD devices were all located in left pectoral position and consisted of 25 single and 20 dual chamber defibrillators. During the procedure, tachyarrhythmia detection (VF 296 +/- 20 ms, VT 376 +/- 49 ms) of the devices was maintained active (monitoring mode), only ICD therapies were inactivated. The indifferent electrode of the electrical cauter/RF generator was placed in standard positions (right/left mid-femoral position [n = 27/8], thoracic spine area [n = 10]). After the procedure, the ICD memory was checked for detections and for changes in the programming. There was no oversensing, reprogramming, or damage of any defibrillator caused by RF energy. Despite the lack of undesired interactions, ICDs should be inactivated preoperatively to assure maximum patient safety. However, should inactivation not be possible, or the achievement uncertain, electromagnetic interference is highly unlikely.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in cardiovascular care: technologic advances and new indications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Present generation implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) have become a proven primary therapeutic option in management of symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias and are now being increasingly used for primary prevention. The addition of biventricular pacing and atrial defibrillation to these devices has had an impact on the management of several new patient populations. The widespread application of these devices requires precise knowledge of their potential benefits and factors that could adversely affect device function.

RECENT FINDINGS

ICD therapy has improved the survival of coronary disease patients with left ventricular dysfunction by reducing sudden death rate. In congestive heart failure patients, ICD therapy and biventricular pacing improves heart failure status thus improving overall survival and quality of life. Atrial defibrillation can establish rhythm control in drug refractory atrial fibrillation usually in a "hybrid therapy" prescription.

SUMMARY

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators have proven to be invaluable in the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Incorporation of new technology in these devices has resulted in expanded indications that improve survival and quality of life of new patient populations.