-
J. Cardiovasc. Electrophysiol. · May 2002
Discrimination of ventricular tachycardia from supraventricular tachycardia by a downloaded wavelet-transform morphology algorithm: a paradigm for development of implantable cardioverter defibrillator detection algorithms.
- Charles D Swerdlow, Mark L Brown, Keith Lurie, Jianxin Zhang, Nicole M Wood, Walter H Olson, and Jeffrey M Gillberg.
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA. swerdlow@ucla.edu
- J. Cardiovasc. Electrophysiol. 2002 May 1;13(5):432-41.
IntroductionPresent implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have algorithms that discriminate supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) from ventricular tachycardia (VT). One type of algorithm is based on differences in morphology of ventricular electrograms during VT and SVT. Prior SVT-VT discrimination algorithms have not undergone real-time evaluation in ambulatory patients until they were incorporated permanently into ICDs. This approach may result in incomplete testing of electrogram morphology algorithms because they are influenced by posture, activity, and electrogram maturation. We downloaded software into implanted ICDs to study a novel algorithm that compares morphologies of baseline and tachycardia electrograms based on differences between corresponding coefficients of their wavelet transforms. This comparison is expressed as a match-percent score.Methods And ResultsIn 23 patients, we downloaded the wavelet algorithm into implanted ICDs to assess the temporal and postural stability of baseline electrograms as measured by this algorithm and its accuracy for SVT-VT discrimination. Median follow-up was 6 months. Software was downloaded into all ICDs without altering other device functions. With few exceptions, percent template match in baseline rhythm was stable with changes in body position, rest versus walking, isometric exercise, and over time (1 and 3 months). Using the nominal match-percent threshold of 70%, sensitivity for detection of 38 VTs was 100%. Specificity for rejection of 65 SVTs was 78%. SVTs were rejected for a total of 2.7 hours. Inappropriate detections of SVT as VT were caused by electrogram truncation, myopotential interference with low-amplitude electrograms, waveform alignment error, and rate-dependent aberrancy. The first three accounted for 69% of inappropriate detections and could have been prevented by optimal programming. The optimal match-percent threshold was 60% to 70% based on a receiver-operator characteristic curve. After shocks, the median time for baseline electrogram morphology to normalize was 85 seconds.ConclusionThe wavelet morphology algorithm has high sensitivity for VT detection. Inappropriate detections of SVT as VT may be reduced by optimal programming. Downloadable software permits evaluation of new algorithms in implanted ICDs.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.