Defibrillator challenges for the new millennium: the marriage of device and patient-making and maintaining a good match
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 20, 2026
A New Single Chamber Implantable Defibrillator with Atrial Sensing: A Practical Demonstration of Sensing and Ease of Implantation
Published on: February 28, 2012
P A Friedman1, M Glikson, M S Stanton
1Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA. pfriedman@mayo.edu
Insights
Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) effectively prevent sudden cardiac death, but patient selection and device choice present challenges. Optimal device selection and follow-up are crucial for patient care.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Biomedical Engineering
Background:
- Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are proven effective for preventing sudden cardiac death.
- Current risk stratification tools have limitations, making patient selection for primary prevention controversial.
Observation:
- The wide array of ICD device options complicates matching the best device to individual patient needs.
- Factors influencing device choice include size, longevity, system complexity (single vs. dual chamber), and implant site.
- Preexisting pacemakers require special consideration during ICD implantation.
Findings:
- Optimal patient selection for primary prevention ICDs remains a challenge due to limited risk stratification.
- Matching device characteristics (size, longevity, chamber configuration) to patient profiles is complex.
- Implant site selection impacts defibrillation effectiveness and lead longevity.
- Post-implantation follow-up strategies require careful consideration for device function assessment.
Implications:
- Improved risk stratification tools are needed for better patient selection for ICDs.
- Guidelines are necessary to aid clinicians in selecting the most appropriate ICD system.
- Standardized follow-up protocols can optimize long-term device performance and patient outcomes.
Abstract:
Although it has become clear that implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are effective, important challenges remain for the physician. Due to the limitations of available risk stratification tools, patient selection for primary sudden death prevention remains controversial in many populations. Additionally, the proliferation of device choices has led to challenges in matching the appropriate device to the individual patient: device size is balanced against longevity; the advantages of dual chamber systems is weighed against their increased complexity; physician and patient preferences in device implant site are constrained by site-dependent effects on defibrillation effectiveness and lead failure rates; and special consideration must be given to the patient with a preexisting pacemaker. After ICD placement, determination of appropriate follow-up frequency and methodology to assess device function must be considered. This article will review patient selection, device implant site selection, device-device interactions, single versus dual chamber ICD selection, and follow-up.
Related Concept Videos
01:30Pulse rhythm
Conversely, an irregular pulse pattern is termed dysrhythmia, stemming from disruptions in cardiac muscle...
01:15Dysrhythmias I: Introduction
01:25Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
01:23Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use
01:30Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
01:29Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care