Under-Skin Defibrillators Seen Closer to Reality

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/business/13device.html?src=busln

The likelihood that patients in the United States may some day receive heart defibrillators that can operate without electrical wires connected to their hearts has moved a step closer, according to a study published Wednesday.

[for the rest of this article follow the link - may be interesting to those of you with ICDs]

4 Comments

discussed on ICD forums

by turboz24 - 2010-05-12 10:05:48

We have talked about this type of ICD on the ICD forums before. I have mentioned that it seems that it would be rather uncomfortable, seeing that the generator needs to produce 70-75 joules for defib shock (so larger unit) + the fact that the generator implant location is essentially only skin and bone, you really don't have a lot of tissue to hide a large device on the side of the rib cage. My standard ICD location looks bad enough + is painful at times, I'd hate to see/feel what that one is like.......

shock

by turboz24 - 2010-05-13 01:05:52

From what I have read/been told anything over 10+ joules pretty much feels the same. I only mentioned the output of the ICD because it's going to be physically larger because of the addtional output.

I wonder if there is a higher % of erossion issues with that placement or there might be an lower activity level and body composition requirement....

subcutaeneous ICD

by golden_snitch - 2010-05-13 06:05:05

Hey,

I know one of the EPs in Dr. Bardy's team, Dr. Cappato, who is currently implanting these devices in a hospital in Milan, Italy. I have asked him the same question: isn't it rather uncomfortable at this location and with the high output that is needed. He said, so far none of his patients is complaining. But this type of ICD is only for those patients who really need the shock, whose arrhythmia can't be terminated just by "anti-tachycardia pacing". Maybe a shock is a shock, and a few more joules don't make such a difference? Or maybe they think it doesn't matter as long as it safes their life?

Best wishes
Inga

subcutaeneous ICD

by cmgdavid - 2010-05-15 08:05:54

I am of the mind that direct delivery of treatment is always going to perform better than indirect delivery. I really don't see the clinical problem this solves. Might be a niche product, but I can't see widespread adoption. What I do see is a bunch of marketing guys sitting around a table asking how they can get in on a multi-billion market.

You know you're wired when...

Your pacemaker interferes with your electronic scale.

Member Quotes

Without this little machine, we would not be here.