Validation of a defibrillation lead ventricular volume measurement compared to three-dimensional echocardiography

David E. Haines, Wilson Wong, Robert Canby, Coty Jewell, Mahmoud Houmsse, David Pederson, Lissa Sugeng, John Porterfield, Anil Kottam, John Pearce, Jon Valvano, Joel Michalek, Aron Trevino, Sandeep Sagar, Marc D. Feldman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background There is increasing evidence that using frequent invasive measures of pressure in patients with heart failure results in improved outcomes compared to traditional measures. Admittance, a measure of volume derived from preexisting defibrillation leads, is proposed as a new technique to monitor cardiac hemodynamics in patients with an implantable defibrillator. Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of a new ventricular volume sensor (VVS, CardioVol) compared with 3-dimenssional echocardiography (echo) in patients with an implantable defibrillator. Methods Twenty-two patients referred for generator replacement had their defibrillation lead attached to VVS to determine the level of agreement to a volume measurement standard (echo). Two opposite hemodynamic challenges were sequentially applied to the heart (overdrive pacing and dobutamine administration) to determine whether real changes in hemodynamics could be reliably and repeatedly assessed with VVS. Equivalence of end-diastolic volume (EDV) and stroke volume (SV) determined by both methods was also assessed. Results EDV and SV were compared using VVS and echo. VVS tracked expected physiologic trends. EDV was modulated −10% by overdrive pacing (14 mL). SV was modulated −13.7% during overdrive pacing (–6 mL) and increased over baseline +14.6% (+8 mL) with dobutamine. VVS and echo mean EDVs were found statistically equivalent, with margin of equivalence 13.8 mL (P <.05). Likewise, mean SVs were found statistically equivalent with margin of equivalence 15.8 mL (P <.05). Conclusion VVS provides an accurate method for ventricular volume assessment using chronically implanted defibrillator leads and is statistically equivalent to echo determination of mean EDV and SV.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1515-1522
Number of pages8
JournalHeart Rhythm
Volume14
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2017

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Admittance
  • Heart failure
  • Left ventricular end-diastolic volume
  • Preload
  • RECHARGE
  • Right ventricular shocking lead
  • Three-dimensional echocardiography
  • Ventricular volume sensor

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Haines, D. E., Wong, W., Canby, R., Jewell, C., Houmsse, M., Pederson, D., Sugeng, L., Porterfield, J., Kottam, A., Pearce, J., Valvano, J., Michalek, J., Trevino, A., Sagar, S., & Feldman, M. D. (2017). Validation of a defibrillation lead ventricular volume measurement compared to three-dimensional echocardiography. Heart Rhythm, 14(10), 1515-1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.06.005