Case Report| Volume 25, ISSUE 5, P262-265, May 2022

High defibrillation threshold with right-sided ICD implantation was resolved by a dual coil lead via persistent left superior vena cava

Published:November 22, 2021DOI:


      Persistent left superior vena cava (PLSVC) can be problematic when device implantation is scheduled from the left side because of the technical difficulty in delivering leads. Right-sided implantation is an alternative method, but there is a risk of a high defibrillation threshold (DFT). Transvenous implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) was scheduled for a 54-year-old man with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and monomorphic non-sustained ventricular tachycardia, but computed tomography revealed the presence of a PLSVC. Right-sided ICD implantation was performed first; however, an ICD shock at 35 J failed to terminate the induced ventricular fibrillation (VF). Re-implantation via the PLSVC by a left subclavian approach with a dual coil lead was performed next. The dual coil right ventricular lead was successfully implanted via the PLSVC, and the induced VF was terminated by a single shock at 25 J. In the present case, the proximal coil was located in the coronary sinus (CS) and it enabled an antero-posterior defibrillation vector across the left ventricle. In addition to the re-location of the ICD generator from the right side to the left side, the new positioning of the proximal coil inside the CS is likely to have contributed to the great improvement of the DFT.
      <Learning objective: In cases with persistent left superior vena cava, left-sided implantationof an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) can be problematic because of the technical difficulty, but right-sided implantation has a risk of a high defibrillation threshold (DFT). Leftsided ICD via the persistent left superior vena cava with a dual coil lead enables an antero-posterior defibrillation vector across the left ventricle by positioning of the proximal coil inside the coronary sinus and contributes to a great improvement of the DFT.>
      CS (coronary sinus), DFT (defibrillation threshold), EF (ejection fraction), ICD (implantable cardioverter defibrillator), LV (left ventricular), PLSVC (persistent left superior vena cava), SVC (superior vena cava), VF (ventricular fibrillation)


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Cardiology Cases
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Schreve-Steensma AM
        • van der Valk PH
        • Ten Kate JB
        • Kofflard MJ
        Discovery of a persistent left superior vena cava during pacemaker implantation.
        Neth Heart J. 2008; 16: 272-274
        • Al-Atia B
        • Vandenberk B
        • Vörös G
        • Garweg C
        • Ector J
        • Willems R.
        Predictors of a high defibrillation threshold test during routine ICD implantation.
        Acta Cardiol. 2018; 73: 267-273
        • Gold MR
        • Shih HT
        • Herre J
        • Breiter D
        • Zhang Y
        • Schwartz M
        Low Energy Safety Study Investigators. Comparison of defibrillation efficacy and survival associated with right versus left pectoral placement for implantable defibrillators.
        Am J Cardiol. 2007; 100: 243-246
        • Hsu JC
        • Marcus GM
        • Al-Khatib SM
        • Wang Y
        • Curtis JP
        • Sood N
        • Parker MW
        • Kluger J
        • Lampert R
        • Russo AM.
        Predictors of an inadequate defibrillation safety margin at ICD implantation: insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64: 256-264
        • Mizukami K
        • Yokoshiki H
        • Mitsuyama H
        • Watanabe M
        • Tenma T
        • Matsui Y
        • Tsutsui H.
        Predictors of high defibrillation threshold in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator using a transvenous dual-coil lead.
        Circ J. 2015; 79: 77-84
        • Swerdlow CD
        • Russo AM
        • Degroot PJ.
        The dilemma of ICD implant testing.
        Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2007; 30: 675-700
        • Rodríguez-Mañero M
        • Kreidieh B
        • Ibarra-Cortez SH
        • Álvarez P
        • Schurmann P
        • Dave AS
        • Valderrábano M.
        Coronary vein defibrillator coil placement in patients with high defibrillation thresholds.
        J Arrhythm. 2018; 35: 79-85
        • Williams Jr, TA
        • Abe O
        • Mitre CA
        • Kassotis J.
        Low defibrillation threshold in a patient with a dual-coil defibrillator lead implanted through a persistent left superior vena cava.
        Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2012; 35: e274-e275
        • Ghazzal B
        • Sabayon D
        • Kiani S
        • Leon AR
        • Delurgio D
        • Patel AM
        • Lloyd MS
        • Westerman S
        • Shah A
        • Merchant FM
        • El-Chami MF.
        Cardiac implantable electronic devices in patients with persistent left superior vena cava-A single center experience.
        J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020; 31: 1175-1181
        • Trenson S
        • Doering M
        • Hindricks G
        • Winnik S
        • Richter S.
        Transvenous lead extraction in a patient with persistent left superior vena cava.
        Heart Rhythm Case Rep. 2021; 7: 153-156