Skip to main content
Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology logoLink to Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology
. 2024 Oct 25;29(6):e70015. doi: 10.1111/anec.70015

Biotronik Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator for Measurement of Intrathoracic Impedance: A Report of Two Cases

Xuqing Ying 1, Xinyue Yu 2, Weixun Cai 1, Xiaomin Chen 1, Lihua Wang 3, Qingcheng Wang 3,, Jie Pang 4,
PMCID: PMC11503685  PMID: 39451048

ABSTRACT

Objectives

Two patients were received ICDs (Biotronic Iforia7 VR‐TDX). Holter analysis revealed pacing spikes, which occurred regularly at 100 ms intervals following QRS complexes, with consecutive 1024 test pulses at hourly intervals during a specific time, and the VP was 0%.

Methods

By analyzing the dynamic electrocardiogram and consulting relevant literature, it was found that this is a feature of the ICD that measures thoracic impedance.

Results

This phenomenon is a special function for the purpose of transthoracic impedance measurement, which can monitor the heart failure.

Conclusions

This phenomenon should not be regarded as an interference signal or an abnormal sign of pacemaker malfunction.

Keywords: heart failure, ICD, transthoracic impedance


graphic file with name ANEC-29-e70015-g003.jpg

1. Case 1

A 53‐year‐old man was hospitalized for old myocardial infarction and heart failure. 1 month earlier, he had severe chest pain and was diagnosed with acute ST‐segment elevated myocardial infarction, and a PCI was performed successfully. An electrocardiogram showed a reduced LVEF of 30% in this admission, so an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), Biotronic Iforia7 VR‐TDX, was implanted on April 1, 2021. The patient was monitored for 24 h using a Holter ECG (Beneware CardioTrack CT‐08S Model). Pulse spikes were seen which occurred regularly at 100 ms intervals following QRS complexes, with consecutive 1024 test pulses at hourly intervals during 13:15–00:15 (Figure 1). Similar signals were obtained during the 01:55–07:55 period, with the pacemaker programming showing VP as 0%.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Pacing spikes occurred regularly at 100 ms intervals following QRS complexes.

2. Case 2

A 61‐year‐old man was clinically diagnosed with dilated cardiomyopathy. The patient underwent Iforia7 VR‐TDX implantation on April 13, 2021, and then monitored for 24 h using Holter ECG. Signal analysis revealed pulse spikes, which occurred regularly at 100 ms intervals following QRS complexes, with consecutive 1024 test pulses at hourly intervals during 13:51–09:51 (Figure 2), and the VP was 0%.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Pacing spikes occurred regularly at 100 ms intervals following QRS complexes.

3. Discussion

These unusual ventricular spikes are explained by the intrathoracic impedance measurement (ITI) of Biotronik ICDs. When the ITI is programmed “ON”, 1024 subthreshold test pulses will be sent per hour between the right ventricular coil and the ICD can. Though visible on the standard ECG leads, the test pulses have no adverse effect on patients. Because the test pulses are delivered 100 ms after Vs or Vp QRS complex meeting the refractory period of myocardium and their energy is too small to capture the heart (1 V @ 0.03 ms) (Rosa, Combes, and Boveda 2014; Squara and Alonso 2014; Ząbek et al. 2019).

Notably, due to the low energy of the test pulses, the corresponding pacing spike signals on the ECG are often not easily discernible. In such cases, it is typically necessary to utilize the dedicated pacing detection mode of Holter recording devices. By employing specialized algorithms, these devices can identify and mark the pacing spikes, allowing for clear visualization of the impedance monitoring process despite the subtle nature of the pacing signals on the ECG trace.

Measurement of intrathoracic impedance has been shown to be useful in early detection of worsening heart failure (Yu et al. 2005; Heist et al. 2014; Conraads et al. 2011; Bohm et al. 2016; van Veldhuisen et al. 2011). As heart failure gets worse, accumulation of intrathoracic fluid decreases the impedance of electrical current passed across the lung (Yu et al. 2005). Therefore, fluid index derived from the changes of intrathoracic impedance has been supposed to guide the management of patients with heart failure. However, its reliability remained contradictory in further clinical trials, with wide‐ranging sensitivity (20.7%–76.9%) (Yu et al. 2005; Heist et al. 2014; Conraads et al. 2011) and no improvement of outcomes in terms of cardiovascular hospitalization (Bohm et al. 2016; van Veldhuisen et al. 2011).

In view of the low specificity of intrathoracic impedance to pulmonary congestion, the intracardiac impedance measured between the RV and LV leads by cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device has been investigated to predict heart failure‐related hospitalization (Stahl et al. 2009; Suzuki et al. 2017; Delnoy et al. 2021). After promising animal experiments (Stahl et al. 2009), BIO. Detect HF II study showed that intracardiac impedance correlated well with the stroke volume determined by echocardiography in a controlled clinical setting. Several studies have shown that the changes in intracardiac impedance correlate with LV volume changes (Delnoy et al. 2021). And without the influence of extracardiac tissues to the measurement, intracardiac impedance was proved to provide more accurate information to predicate worsening heart failure (Suzuki et al. 2017).

With further research, it was made known that the performance in predicting outcomes in a complex clinical syndrome by monitoring single parameter is limited (Maier et al. 2019; Whellan et al. 2010). Therefore, intrathoracic impedance‐based multiparameter monitoring has been widely studied (Whellan et al. 2010; Boehmer et al. 2017; Vamos et al. 2018).

In PARTNERS HF study (Program to Access and Review Trending Information and Evaluate Correlation to Symptoms in Patients with Heart Failure study), the clinical outcomes of intrathoracic impedance monitoring could be improved by combining additional diagnostic parameters such as duration of atrial fibrillation, patient activity, nocturnal HR, heart rate variability, and biventricular pacing rate with CRT (Whellan et al. 2010). Vamos et al. refined the heart failure detection algorithm described in PARTNERS HF study and shown improved clinical reliability by increasing specificity from 37.5% to 86.5%, positive predictive value from 34.1% to 69.8% and area under the curve from 0.787 to 0.922 (p < 0.01), without a relevant loss in sensitivity (96.9% vs. 93.8%) (Vamos et al. 2018). Similarly, the HeartLogic, a multisensor algorithm combining intrathoracic impedance with heart sounds and respiration rate among other sensor data, showed high sensitivity of 70% at a false alert rate of 1.47 per patient‐year in the MultiSENSE (Multisensor Chronic Evaluation in Ambulatory Heart Failure Patients) study (Boehmer et al. 2017). And daily implant‐based multiparameter remote monitoring had a significantly beneficial effect on the composite clinical score and all‐cause mortality in heart failure patients treated with ICDs and CRT‐Ds (Hindricks et al. 2014). Different from the other trials that focus on combination of several predictive parameters, the SELENE HF (Selection of potential predictors of worsening heart failure) study developed a predicting algorithm based on temporal trends of remote monitoring data with sensitivity of 65.5% and only 0.69 false alerts per patient‐year (D'Onofrio et al. 2022).

Since intrathoracic impedance plays an important role in worsening heart failure prediction, Cardiologists need to be informed about its specific measurement in patients with Biotronik ICDs.

Author Contributions

Xuqing Ying: conceptualization, investigation, writing – original draft. Xinyue Yu: methodology, writing – review and editing. Weixun Cai: investigation, visualization. Xiaomin Chen: methodology. Lihua Wang: formal analysis. Qingcheng Wang: supervision, project administration. Jie Pang: supervision, funding acquisition.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Contributor Information

Qingcheng Wang, Email: giggs12345@163.com.

Jie Pang, Email: pangjiehz@163.com.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available upon request from the authors. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Boehmer, J. P. , Hariharan R., Devecchi F. G., et al. 2017. “A Multisensor Algorithm Predicts Heart Failure Events in Patients With Implanted Devices: Results From the MultiSENSE Study.” JACC: Heart Failure 5: 216–225. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bohm, M. , Drexler H., Oswald H., et al. 2016. “Fluid Status Telemedicine Alerts for Heart Failure: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” European Heart Journal 37: 3154–3163. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Conraads, V. M. , Tavazzi L., Santini M., et al. 2011. “Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value of Implantable Intrathoracic Impedance Monitoring as a Predictor of Heart Failure Hospitalizations: The SENSE‐HF Trial.” European Heart Journal 32: 2266–2273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Delnoy, P. H. M. , Gutleben K. J., Bruun N. E., Maier S. K. G., Oswald H., and Stellbrink C.. 2021. “Hemodynamic Monitoring by Intracardiac Impedance Measured by Cardiac Resynchronization Defibrillators: Evaluation in a Controlled Clinical Setting (BIO. Detect HF II Study).” Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal 21, no. 4: 209–218. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. D'Onofrio, A. , Solimene F., Calò L., et al. 2022. “Combining Home Monitoring Temporal Trends From Implanted Defibrillators and Baseline Patient Risk Profile to Predict Heart Failure Hospitalizations: Results From the SELENE HF Study.” EP Europace 24, no. 2: 234–244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Heist, E. K. , Herre J. M., Binkley P. F., et al. 2014. “Analysis of Different Device‐Based Intrathoracic Impedance Vectors for Detection of Heart Failure Events (From the Detect Fluid Early From Intrathoracic Impedance Monitoring Study).” American Journal of Cardiology 114: 1249–1256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hindricks, G. , Taborsky M., Glikson M., et al. 2014. “Implant‐Based Multiparameter Telemonitoring of Patients With Heart Failure (IN‐TIME): A Randomised Controlled Trial.” Lancet 384: 583–590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Maier, S. , Paule S., Jung W., et al. 2019. “Evaluation of Thoracic Impedance Trends for Implant‐Based Remote Monitoring in Heart Failure Patients – Results From the (J‐) HomeCARE‐II Study.” Journal of Electrocardiology 53: 100–108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Rosa, A. , Combes N., and Boveda S.. 2014. “An ICD Case: “Spike Quiz”.” Cardiovascular Medicine 17, no. 4: 121–122. [Google Scholar]
  10. Squara, F. , and Alonso C.. 2014. “Unexceptional Occurrence of Tricky ECG Findings in Patients Having New Biotronik ICDs.” International Journal of Cardiology 176, no. 1: 262–263. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Stahl, C. , Walker T., Straub A., et al. 2009. “Assessing Acute Ventricular Volume Changes by Intracardiac Impedance in a Chronic Heart Failure Animal Model.” Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 32: 1395–1401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Suzuki, H. , Nodera M., Kamioka M., Kaneshiro T., Kamiyama Y., and Takeishi Y.. 2017. “Intracardiac Impedance After Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Is a Novel Predictor for Worsening of Heart Failure.” Heart and Vessels 32: 926–931. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Vamos, M. , Nyolczas N., Bari Z., et al. 2018. “Refined Heart Failure Detection Algorithm for Improved Clinical Reliability of OptiVol Alerts in CRT‐D Recipients.” Cardiology Journal 25, no. 2: 236–244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. van Veldhuisen, D. J. , Braunschweig F., Conraads V., et al. 2011. “Intrathoracic Impedance Monitoring, Audible Patient Alerts, and Outcome in Patients With Heart Failure.” Circulation 124: 1719–1726. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Whellan, D. J. , Ousdigian K. T., Al‐Khatib S. M., et al. 2010. “Combined Heart Failure Device Diagnostics Identify Patients at Higher Risk of Subsequent Heart Failure Hospitalizations: Results From PARTNERS HF (Program to Access and Review Trending Information and Evaluate Correlation to Symptoms in Patients With Heart Failure) Study.” Journal of the American College of Cardiology 55, no. 17: 1803–1810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Yu, C. M. , Wang L., Chau E., et al. 2005. “Intrathoracic Impedance Monitoring in Patients With Heart Failure: Correlation With Fluid Status and Feasibility of Early Warning Preceding Hospitalization.” Circulation 112: 841–848. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Ząbek, A. , Małecka B., Nowosielska‐Ząbek E., Dębski M., Boczar K., and Lelakowski J.. 2019. “Pacing Spikes Following QRS Complexes: What Is the Mechanism?” Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology 24, no. 2: e12545. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available upon request from the authors. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.


Articles from Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology are provided here courtesy of International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc. and Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

RESOURCES