J. Brunn et al., Is there a need for routine testing of ICD defibrillation capacity? Results from more than 1000 studies, EUR HEART J, 21(2), 2000, pp. 162-169
Aims Benefits and complications of postoperative implant-Conclusions Our ex
perience demonstrates that postoperative implantable cardioverter-defibrill
ator tests are controversial operative tests of the defibrillation function
of implantable matters. This study sought to assess the necessity of cardi
overter-defibrillators rarely reveal dysfunctions. As defibrillation functi
on tests after implantation. testing is unpleasant for the patient and not
free of complications, rests might be restricted to those patients in whom
Methods and Results We retrospectively analysed 1007 a dysfunction is suspe
cted and to those patients in whom implantable cardioverter-defibrillator t
ests in 587 systems class I or class III antiarrhythmic drugs have been add
ed to and 556 patients. Nine hundred and thirty implantable the antiarrhyth
mic drug regimen. cardioverter-defibrillator tests (89.4%) were routinely p
erformed. Seventy-one tests (7%) were performed after a change in the antia
rrhythmic drug regimen and six tests (0.60%) because of a suspected dysfunc
tion of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. during routine tests. f
our systems (0.4%) failed to defibrillate the patient. However. in all but
one lest. abnormalities of the system had been observed before the test. Af
ter the addition of antiarrhythmic drugs, two of 71 implantable cardioverte
r-defibrillator systems (2.8%) failed to defibrillate the patient. One of s
ix systems tested due to a suspected dysfunction failed to defibrillate the
patient. During 16 tests (1.6%). complications occurred.
Conclusions Our experience demonstrates that postoperative tests of the def
ibrillation function of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators rarely reve
al dysfunctions. As testing is unpleasant for the patient and not free of c
omplications, tests might be restricted to those patients in whom a dysfunc
tion is suspected and to those patients in whom class I or class III anntia
rrhytmic drugs have been added to the antiarrhythmic drug regimen.