- More basal pacing opportunities without compromising lead stability. Studies have shown pacing more basally to be associated with reverse LV remodeling and improved outcomes1,2
- More options to manage common pacing complications, such as phrenic nerve stimulation and high pacing thresholds, resulting in less need for lead repositioning and fewer surgical revisions3-6
-
TailoredTherapy™ features designed to customize treatment to each patient’s unique needs, including:
- ShockGuard® technology with DecisionTx® programming, designed to reduce unnecessary or inappropriate shocks resulting in 98.5% of patients being free of inappropriate shocks at 1 year7
- DeFT Response® technology, which provides more noninvasive programming flexibility in the management of DFTs and 40J delivered energy for a greater safety margins
- Antitachycardia pacing (ATP) while charging and prior to charging in the VF zone further extends the programming options for converting tachyarrhythmias before or during charge
- QuickOpt® timing cycle optimization, which provides quick and effective optimization for more patients at a push of a button
- The % BiV-Pacing alert, which notifies clinics when biventricular pacing is less than the programmed threshold
- Automatic threshold measurements and adjustments in all chambers (RA, RV, and LV) to promote patient safety
- Streamlined header connectors (IS4 and DF4) reduce pocket bulk
- Built on the proven Unify® CRT-D platform, the smallest footprint of any device available without compromising longevity, quality or reliability
- QHR® battery provides greater capacity for enhanced longevity and improved charge time performance
QHR is a registered trademark of Greatbatch Medical
*RV = 2.0 V, LV = 2.0 V, A = 2.0 V, 0.5 ms, 60 ppm, 500 ohms, 3 max charges per year, BiVCap®Confirm On
1. Singh, J.P. et al. Left ventricular lead position and clinical outcome in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) Trial. Circulation. 2011 Mar 22;123(11):1159-66.
2. Merchant, F.M. et al. Impact of segmental left ventricle lead position on cardiac resynchronization therapy outcomes.
Heart Rhythm. 2010 May;7(5):639-44.
3. Forleo, G.B. et al. Left ventricular pacing with a new quadripolar transvenous lead for CRT: early results of a prospective comparison with conventional implant outcomes. Heart Rhythm. 2011 Jan;8(1):31-7.
4. Data compiled from clinical study results, on file at St. Jude Medical in Report 60034670.
5. Moss, A.J. et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy for the prevention of heart failure events.
N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1329-38.
6. Gras, D. et al. Implantation of cardiac resynchronization therapy systems in the CARE-HF trial: procedural success rate and safety. Europace. 2007 Jul;9(7):516-22.
7. Findings based on analysis from the ACT Registry, data on file at St. Jude Medical in Report 60032047.