- The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) has evolved from devices through epicardial patch electrodes introduced by thoracotomy to transvenous leads advanced to the right ventricle
- Transvenous ICD (T-ICD) reduced the morbidity associated w/thoracotomy implants, however involves potential complications including: hemopericardium, hemothorax, pneumothorax, lead dislodgement, lead malfunction, device-related infection, and venous occlusion
- Subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) offers the advantage of eliminating the need for intravenous & intracardiac leads. Clinical trials have proven its effectiveness in detecting and treating ventricular fibrillation/tachycardia; however its major disadvantage is its inability to provide bradycardia rate support and anti-tachycardia pacing to terminate ventricular tachycardia
- No study has directly compared the T-ICD & the S-ICD, however clinical data suggests that its use be considered in relatively younger patients (i.e., age <40 years), those at increased risk for bacteremia, patients with indwelling intravascular hardware at risk for endovascular infection, or in patients with compromised venous access
References
Aziz S, Leon A, et al. The Subcutaneous Defibrillator. JACC Vol 63, Issue 15, Pages 1473-1479
