T J Ransbury

Research Triangle Park Laboratories, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina, United States

Are you T J Ransbury?

Claim your profile

Publications (3)10.86 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A percutaneously placed, intravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator has been developed (PICD) with a right ventricular (RV) single coil lead and titanium electrodes in the superior vena cava (SVC)-brachiocephelic vein (BCV) region and the inferior vena cava (IVC). This feasibility study compared defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) of the PICD to those of a conventional ICD in humans. Ten patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and EF≤ 35% were randomized to initial testing with either PICD or conventional ICD. A standard dual coil lead was positioned in the RV apex. If randomized to PICD, the device was placed into the vasculature such that one titanium electrode was positioned in the SVC-BCV region and the second in the IVC. For PICD DFTs, the RV coil of the conventional ICD lead was connected to the PICD mandrel [shock vector: RV (+) to SVC-BCV (-) + IVC (-)]. When testing the conventional ICD, a subcutaneous pocket was formed in the left pectoralis region, and the ICD was connected to the lead system and positioned in the pocket [shock vector: RV (+) to SVC (-) + Active Can (-)]. Each device was removed prior to testing with the other. A step-down binary search protocol determined the DFT with the initial shock being 9 J. The mean PICD DFT was 7.6 ± 3.3 J, and the conventional ICD system demonstrated a mean DFT of 9.5 ± 4.7 J (p =0.28, paired t-test, N=10). The intravascular defibrillator has similar defibrillation thresholds to that of commercially available ICDs.
    Heart rhythm: the official journal of the Heart Rhythm Society 10/2013; · 4.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A percutaneously placed, totally intravascular defibrillator has been developed that shocks via a right ventricular (RV) single-coil and titanium electrodes in the superior vena cava (SVC) and the inferior vena cava (IVC). This study evaluated the defibrillation threshold (DFT) with this electrode configuration to determine the effect of different biphasic waveform tilts and second-phase durations as well as the contribution of the IVC electrode. Eight Bluetick hounds (wt = 30-40 kg) were anesthetized and the RV coil (first-phase anode) was placed in the RV apex. The intravascular defibrillator (PICD®, Model no. IIDM-G, InnerPulse Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, USA) was positioned such that the titanium electrodes were in the SVC and IVC . Ventricular fibrillation was electrically induced and a Bayesian up-down technique was employed to determine DFT with two configurations: RV to SVC + IVC and RV to SVC. Three waveform tilts (65%, 50%, and 42%) and two second-phase durations (equal to the first phase [balanced] and truncated at 3 ms [unbalanced]) were randomly tested. The source capacitance of the defibrillator was 120 μF for all waveforms. DFT with the IVC electrode was significantly lower than without the IVC electrode for all waveforms tested (527 ± 9.3 V [standard error], 14.5 J vs 591 ± 7.4 V, 18.5 J, P < 0.001). Neither waveform tilt nor second-phase duration significantly changed the DFT. In canines, a totally intravascular implantable defibrillator with electrodes in the RV apex, SVC, and IVC had a DFT similar to that of standard nonthoracotomy lead systems. No significant effect was noted with changes in tilt or with balanced or unbalanced waveforms.
    Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 01/2011; 34(5):577-83. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An intravascular, percutaneously placed implantable defibrillator (InnerPulse percutaneous intravascular cardioverter-defibrillator [PICD]) with a right ventricular (RV) single-coil lead and titanium electrodes in the superior vena cava (SVC) and the inferior vena cava (IVC) has been developed. The purpose of this study was to compare defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) of the PICD to those of a conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in canines. Eight Bluetick hounds were randomized to initial placement of either a PICD or a conventional ICD. For PICD DFTs, a single-coil RV defibrillator lead was placed in the RV apex, and the device was positioned in the venous vasculature with electrodes in the SVC and IVC. With the conventional ICD, an RV lead was placed in the RV apex and an SVC coil was appropriately positioned. The ICD active can (AC) was implanted in a subcutaneous pocket formed in the left anterior chest wall and connected to the lead system. DFT was determined by a three-reversal, step up-down method to estimate the 80% success level. Two configurations were tested for the conventional ICD (#1: RV to SVC+AC; #2: RV to AC). A single configuration (RV to SVC+IVC) was evaluated for the PICD. Mean PICD DFT was 14.8 ± 1.53 (SE) J. Conventional #1 configuration demonstrated mean DFT of 20.2 ± 2.45 J and #2 of 27.5 ± 1.95 J. The PICD had a significantly lower DFT than the better conventional ICD configuration (#1; mean difference 5.4 ± 2.1 J, P <.05, paired t-test, N = 8). The new intravascular defibrillator had a significantly lower DFT than the conventional ICD in this canine model.
    Heart rhythm: the official journal of the Heart Rhythm Society 10/2010; 8(2):288-92. · 4.56 Impact Factor