Induced versus spontaneous ventricular fibrillation in subcutaneous ICD recipients: impact on sensing and therapy delivery
C Lopez, I Mondragon, M Benjamin, L Tomas, E Aversa, M Abello, J Armentano, J Chavez · 2026
Read Induced versus spontaneous ventricular fibrillation in subcutaneous ICD recipients: impact on sensing and therapy delivery by C Lopez, I Mondragon, M Benjamin, L Tomas, E Aversa, M Abello, J Armentano, J Chavez (2026) in the Tower of Babel, a free online library of public-domain works preserved in clean, searchable text. No sign-up. The full text is served as a plain-text file at a predictable URL, where text is present: https://antarctic-labs.com/tower-of-babel/pmc-13300534.txt.
Description
C Lopez and co-authors compare test-induced and spontaneous ventricular fibrillation in recipients of subcutaneous defibrillators, in a 2026 case series. At implant, a fifty-hertz burst triggers fibrillation to prove the device can sense and shock it, and the authors measured timing in those episodes against each patient's first real event. The series covered ten consecutive patients, mostly treated for idiopathic fibrillation, with stored device electrograms analyzed for both episode types.
Every episode, induced and spontaneous alike, was detected correctly and ended by the first shock. Spontaneous events finished faster, with duration and sensing time each shorter by roughly three seconds on average. The gap traced to a residual delay the authors name and define, a sensing pause created by the induction burst and absent in real events. They argue the delay is an artifact of the test method, not a flaw in the sensing algorithm.
Catalog record
| CREATOR | C Lopez, I Mondragon, M Benjamin, L Tomas, E Aversa, M Abello, J Armentano, J Chavez |
|---|---|
| YEAR | 2026 |
| COLLECTION | PAPERS |
| FORMAT | TXT |
| FILE SIZE | 3 KB |
| VERSION | 1.0 |
| LICENSE | CC BY 4.0 |
| RIGHTS | CC BY |
| SOURCE | Europe PMC |