S Grice

Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, Scottsdale, AZ, United States

Are you S Grice?

Claim your profile

Publications (11)47.06 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This report describes our experience with noncontact mapping and electroanatomic mapping in complex ablations, which are defined as ablations done after failure of conventional ablation. Patients were included (N = 68; 49% with structural heart disease) in whom previous ablation failed and in whom a second procedure was done with advanced mapping. Non-contact mapping was used in 17 patients, electroanatomic mapping in 36, and both noncontact and electroanatomic mapping in 15. Arrhythmias included focal atrial tachycardia (n = 16), reentrant atrial tachycardia (n = 14), right ventricular outflow tachycardia (n = 10), post-myocardial infarction ventricular tachycardia (n = 9), and others (n = 19). Acute success at the second ablation was achieved in 79% of patients. At 20 +/- 9 months after the procedure, 69% of these patients reported having significantly fewer symptoms than before the second ablation, and 51% were free of symptoms. Only 16% were using antiarrhythmic medications. Complications included a small pericardial effusion in two patients, hypotension in one patient, and a femoral pseudoaneurysm in another. Advanced mapping is a useful and safe adjunct for catheter ablation after ablation has failed in patients with complex substrate.
    Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 05/2005; 28(4):316-23. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: [corrected] The aim of this study was to determine whether noncontact mapping is feasible in the right ventricle and assess its utility in guiding ablation of difficult-to-treat right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) ventricular tachycardia (VT). In patients without inducible arrhythmia, RVOT VT may be difficult to ablate. Noncontact mapping permits ablation guided by a single tachycardia complex, which may facilitate ablation of difficult cases. However, the mapping system may be geometry-dependent, and it has not been validated in the unique geometry of the RVOT. Ten patients with left bundle inferior axis VT, no history of myocardial infarction and normal left ventricular function underwent noncontact guided ablation; seven had failed previous ablation and three had received a defibrillator. All noncontact maps were analyzed by a blinded reviewer to determine whether the arrhythmia focus was epicardial and to predict on the basis of the map whether arrhythmia would recur. The procedure was acutely successful in 9 of 10 patients. During a mean follow-up of 11 months, 7 of 9 patients remained arrhythmia-free. Both patients in whom the blinded reviewer predicted failure had arrhythmia recurrence: one due to epicardial origin with multiple endocardial exit sites and one due to discordance between site of lesion placement and earliest activation on noncontact map. Mechanisms of ablation failure in RVOT VT include absence of sustained arrhythmia, difficulty with substrate localization and epicardial origin of arrhythmia. In this study, noncontact mapping was safely and effectively used to guide ablation of patients with difficult-to-treat RVOT VT.
    Journal of the American College of Cardiology 07/2002; 39(11):1808-12. · 14.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bidirectional isthmus block is associated with successful atrial flutter ablation, whereas creation of increased isthmus conduction delay without block can be proarrhythmic. Often, halo catheter electrodes fail to provide adequate sub-Eustachian isthmus recordings. The aim of this study was to determine if progressive isthmus conduction delay results in the false appearance of block during atrialflutter ablation. A 20-pole deflectable catheter was prospectively positioned across the sub-Eustachian isthmus (from the coronary sinus os [CSO] to 7:00 on the tricuspid valve annulus [TVA] clock face in the left anterior oblique [LAO] projection) in nine patients undergoing atrial flutter ablation. During sinus rhythm, conduction time was measured from the CSO to the 7:00 position while pacing the CSO. Measurements were repeated after each linear lesion and after conduction block was achieved. Transisthmus conduction time at baseline, just prior to success, and after the presence of complete block was 54 +/- 9, 123 +/- 39, and 155 +/- 30 ms, respectively (P < or = 0.01). The marked delay prior to complete block resulted in reversal of the activation sequence in electrodes at TVA 7:00, creating the false appearance of isthmus block; the isthmus electrodes clearly distinguished delay from block. Catheter ablation results in progressive isthmus conduction delay prior to the creation of complete block. Electrodes spanning the isthmus and line of block are critical for distinguishing conduction delay (and pseudoisthmus block) from block.
    Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 03/2002; 25(3):308-15. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology 10/2000; 11(9):1061. · 3.48 Impact Factor
  • Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology 01/2000; 11(9):1061-1061. · 3.48 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Whether an ICD is placed via a left- or right-sided approach depends on venous access, the presence of a preexisting pacemaker, and other factors. Since the DFT is affected by lead position, which in turn is determined in part by the side of access, right-sided venous access could adversely affect DFTs. Furthermore, right-sided active can placement directs electric current toward the right hemithorax, which could further increase DFTs. This study sought to determine whether DFTs were increased by right-sided vascular access, and whether active can technology was beneficial or detrimental with right-sided ICD placement. Stepdown to failure DFTs were found in 290 patients receiving transvenous systems at the time of initial ICD implantation. Of these, 271 (93%) received left-sided systems and 19 (7%) received right-sided systems. The mean DFT in systems placed via left-sided vascular access was 11.3 +/- 5.3 J versus 17.0 +/- 4.9 J for right-sided implantation (P < 0.0001); right-sided DFTs were elevated for both active can and cold can systems. Right-sided active can devices had a lower DFT than right-sided cold can systems (15 +/- 4.1 J vs 19 +/- 4.8 J, P = 0.05). The right-sided implantation of implantable defibrillators results in significantly higher DFTs than the left-sided approach. This may be due to the less favorable distribution of the defibrillating field relative to the myocardium with the devices on the right. When right-sided implantation is clinically mandated, active can devices result in lower thresholds and should be used.
    Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 08/1999; 22(8):1186-92. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Current use of newer implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) has changed the spectrum of pacemaker-ICD interactions and provided new tools for testing and understanding those interactions. Testing for pacemaker-ICD interactions was performed in 31 procedures involving 22 patients. The protocol included: (1) evaluation of pacemaker stimulus artifact amplitude and its ratio to that of the evoked ventricular electrogram, (2) testing for inhibition of ventricular fibrillation (VF) detection by the ICD during asynchronous pacing at maximum output, (3) evaluation by pacemaker event marker recordings of pacemaker sensing behavior while programmed to nonasynchronous mode during ventricular tachycardia (VT) or VF, and (4) evaluation of postshock interactions. Inhibition of detection of VT/VF was found in 6 of 22 patients (27.2%). Large stimulus artifact amplitude (>2 mV) or stimulus artifact:evoked QRS ratio > 1/3 had a positive predictive accuracy of 18% and 14.4%, respectively, and a negative predictive accuracy of 100% and 92.3%, respectively, for clinically significant interaction. Asynchronous pacing occurred in 16 of 31 procedures (51.6%), and was due to underdetection by the pacemaker in 4 of 16 (25%) and noise reversion in 12 of 16 (75%). Postshock phenomena occurred in 6 cases, 3 of which were clinically significant. Overall, 11 of 22 patients (50%) had clinically significant interactions discovered by this protocol, which led to system revisions in 6 and to pacemaker output reprogramming in 5. Thus, pacemaker-ICD interactions are frequently detected using a thorough and systematic protocol. Most cases can be managed by system revision or pacemaker reprogramming.
    The American Journal of Cardiology 03/1999; 83(3):360-6. · 3.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Numerous types of interactions between pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have been described. Pacemaker outputs preventing appropriate detection of ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation by the ICD is one of the more serious. Asynchronous pacemaker activity during ventricular arrhythmias may be caused by either nonsensing of the arrhythmia or by noise reversion, which is an algorithm that causes the pacemaker to switch to asynchronous pacing when repetitive sensing at a high rate occurs. We analyzed the mechanisms underlying asynchronous pacemaker activity in ventricular arrhythmias using pacemaker telemetry during the arrhythmia. Thirty-nine induced arrhythmias from 26 different procedures in 19 patients with both pacemakers and ICDs were analyzed. Of the 39 arrhythmias, asynchronous pacemaker activity occurred in 16. The underlying mechanism was nonsensing in 4 episodes and noise reversion in 12 episodes. Clinically significant interference with detection arose on three occasions. Conditions favoring the occurrence of noise reversion include specific pacemaker models, arrhythmia cycle lengths in the range causing noise reversion of the individual pacemaker model, long noise sampling periods, and VVI pacing mode. Noise reversion can be diagnosed by telemetering the pacemaker marker channel during ventricular arrhythmias as a part of routine pacemaker-ICD interaction evaluation. It can be prevented or minimized by programming short ventricular refractory periods or using pacemakers with short retriggerable refractory periods.
    Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 06/1998; 21(5):1111-21. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Numerous types of interactions between pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have been described. Pacemaker outputs preventing appropriate detection of ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation by the ICD is one of the more serious. Asynchronous pacemaker activity during ventricular arrhythmias maybe caused by either nonsensing of the arrhythmia or by noise reversion, which is an algorithm that causes the pacemaker to switch to asynchronous pacing when repetitive sensing at a high rate occurs. We analyzed the mechanisms underlying asynchronous pacemaker activity in ventricular arrhythmias using pacemaker telemetry during the arrhythmia. Thirty-nine induced arrhythmias from 26 different procedures in 19 patients with both pacemakers and ICDs were analyzed. Of the 39 arrhythmias, asynchronous pacemaker activity occurred in 16. The underlying mechanism was nonsensing in 4 episodes and noise reversion in 12 episodes. Clinically significant interference with detection arose on three occasions. Conditions favoring the occurrence of noise reversion include specific pacemaker models, arrhythmia cycle lengths in the range causing noise reversion of the individual pacemaker model, long noise sampling periods, and VVI pacing mode. Noise reversion can be diagnosed by telemetering the pacemaker marker channel during ventricular arrhvthmias as a part of routine pacemaker-ICD interaction evaluation. It can be prevented or minimized by programming short ventricular refractory periods or using pacemakers with shoii retriggerable refractory periods.
    Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology 04/1998; 21(5):1111 - 1121. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to determine the risk of epicardial lead failure during long-term follow-up and its mode of presentation. Despite the high prevalence of epicardial lead-based implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, their long-term performance is unknown, and appropriate follow-up has not been established. The study group comprised all patients in whom an epicardial lead system was implanted at the Mayo Clinic between October 31, 1984 and November 3, 1994. The number of lead fractures and leads with fluid within the insulation and the mode of presentation were determined retrospectively by review of patient visits, radiographs of lead systems and data derived from formal lead testing. At 4 years, the survival rate free of lead malfunction, using formal lead testing, for 160 Medtronic epicardial patches (models 6897 and 6921) was 72% compared with 92.5% for the 179 Cardiac Pacemaker, Inc. (CPI) patches (models 0040 and 0041) (p = 0.01). In addition, five Medtronic patches in three patients had fluid within the lead insulation but no obvious fracture. No CPI patches had fluid identified within the leads. Of 330 Medtronic epicardial pace/sense leads (model 6917), the 4-year survival rate free of lead malfunction as assessed by lead testing was 96%. In all, 19 presentations of lead malfunction were found in 17 patients (2 patients had more than one lead fracture at different times). In 11 (58%) of these presentations, the patients were asymptomatic despite the presence of obvious lead fracture. Epicardial lead malfunction is common on long-term follow-up, and some leads have a failure rate of 28% at 4 years. Many patients with fractured leads remain asymptomatic, despite involvement of multiple leads in some cases. Therefore, consideration should be given to regular periodic lead testing in addition to routine X-ray examination, as asymptomatic lead malfunction can present with normal chest X-ray findings.
    Journal of the American College of Cardiology 03/1998; 31(3):616-22. · 14.09 Impact Factor
  • Journal of The American College of Cardiology - J AMER COLL CARDIOL. 01/1998; 31:334-334.

Publication Stats

148 Citations
47.06 Total Impact Points

Institutions

  • 1998–2005
    • Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
      • Division of Cardiovascular Diseases
      Scottsdale, AZ, United States
  • 1999–2002
    • Mayo Clinic - Rochester
      • Department of Cardiovascular Diseases
      Rochester, Minnesota, United States
    • Tel Aviv University
      Tell Afif, Tel Aviv, Israel