This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Chattipakorn, N. Articles by Ideker, R. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chattipakorn, N. Articles by Ideker, R. E. Related Collections Ablation/ICD/surgery Arrhythmias, clinical electrophysiology, drugs

(Circulation. 2000;101:2458.)
© 2000 American Heart Association, Inc.

Brief Rapid Communications

Left Ventricular Apex Ablation Decreases the Upper Limit of Vulnerability

Nipon Chattipakorn, MD, PhD; Parwis C. Fotuhi, MD; Xiangsheng Zheng, MD; Raymond E. Ideker, MD, PhD

From the Division of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama, Birmingham.

Correspondence to Nipon Chattipakorn, MD, PhD, 1670 University Blvd, Rm B140, Birmingham, AL 35294-0019. E-mail: toon{at}crml.uab.edu

Background—After shocks with an 50% probability of success for the upper limit of vulnerability (ULV₅₀) of strength, the first few activations appear focally on the epicardium at almost the same site at the left ventricular (LV) apex in both successful and failed induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF). We tested the hypothesis that subendocardial ablation at this early site would decrease the shock strength required for the ULV₅₀.

Methods and Results—Ten S1 stimuli were delivered from the right ventricular apex at a 300-ms coupling interval in 5 pigs. Biphasic shocks were delivered from right ventricular–superior vena cava electrodes after the last S1 stimulus. The ULV₅₀ was determined using an up/down protocol with T-wave scanning. Radiofrequency ablation was performed endocardially at the apical LV. The ULV₅₀ was determined again 30 minutes after ablation. To determine the importance of the ablation region, this protocol was repeated in another 5 pigs with ablation at the LV base. Delivered voltage (401±60 versus 323±50 V) and energy (11±3 versus 7±2 J) for the ULV₅₀ were significantly decreased after LV apex ablation by 19% and 34%, respectively. However, no difference existed in ULV₅₀ before and after LV base ablation. Lesions at both the LV apex and base were subendocardial and ranged from 0.8 to 1.1 cm in diameter.

Conclusions—Subendocardial ablation at the apical LV markedly decreases ULV₅₀, which suggests that the activation originating from this postshock early site is responsible for VF initiation and that interventions to electrically silence this site can influence the outcome of VF induction by ULV shocks.

Key Words: ablation • fibrillation • shock