The present invention relates generally to implantable medical device systems that sense and analyze cardiac signals. More particularly, the present invention relates to implantable medical devices that capture cardiac signals within an implantee's body in order to classify cardiac activity as likely benign or malignant.
Implantable cardiac devices typically sense cardiac electrical signals in an implantee and classify the implantee's cardiac rhythm as normal/benign or malignant. Illustrative malignant rhythms may include ventricular fibrillation and/or ventricular tachyarrhythmia. The accuracy with which an implantable medical device analyzes captured signals determines how well it makes therapy and other decisions.
New and/or alternative methods and devices for cardiac signal analysis are desired.
Some illustrative embodiments relate to the use of correlation analysis to identify overdetection of cardiac events. In one example, a High-Low-High pattern of correlation relative to a template is sought. The template may be a static template, it may be a representation of a recent captured event, or it may be an average of several recent captured events. In another example, multiple boundaries for High correlation are defined, wherein a first, higher boundary (requiring greater correlation) allows identification of overdetection based on a smaller set of detected events than a second, lower boundary. In one embodiment, a shorter sequence of High-Low-High is sufficient with the first boundary, while a longer sequence of five or more (for example, eight) alternating events is required for the second boundary. In another embodiment, definitions of High and Low correlation are adapted to the particular signals by using average values for subsets of detected event correlations to establish boundaries.
In another embodiment, correlation analysis is performed multiple times for a given template and detected event by shifting the alignment of the template and the detected event to maximize the correlation score of the analysis. Such shifting may adjust the alignment by one or more samples away from the identified fiducial points for analysis. In another embodiment, stored templates are modified in order to accommodate changes in morphology for selected portions of the signal. In yet another embodiment, multiple features of the template and/or signal are identified and multiple correlation scores are calculated using several different features as alignment points.
When identified, overdetection can be corrected by modifying stored data in order to impact rate analysis. In one such embodiment, data correction is inhibited if the intervals surrounding a likely overdetection are longer than a predetermined threshold. In some embodiments, overdetection correction is inhibited if interval analysis relating to a likely overdetection indicates that it is unlikely to be a particular type of overdetection. In one such embodiment, the intervals surrounding a likely overdetection are analyzed to determine whether an accepted formula for estimating expected QT intervals is met and, if not, the method determines that the likely overdetection is not a T-wave, and so no data correction occurs.
The following detailed description should be read with reference to the drawings. The drawings, which are not necessarily to scale, depict illustrative embodiments and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. Some of the following examples and explanations include references to issued patents and pending patent applications. These references are for illustrative purposes and are not intended to limit the present invention to the particular methods or structures from those referenced patents and patent applications.
Unless implicitly required or explicitly stated, the methods below do not require any particular order of steps. It should be understood that when the following examples refer to a “current event,” in some embodiments, this means the most recently detected cardiac event is being analyzed. However, this need not be the case, and some embodiments perform analysis that is delayed by one or more detections and or a fixed period of time. Choices shown regarding use of rectified/unrectified signals are merely illustrative, and may be changed if desired.
The nomenclature used herein indicates that a signal is sensed by an implantable cardiac device system, events are detected in the sensed signal, and cardiac activity is classified by use of the detected events (detections). Rhythm classification includes the identification of malignant rhythms, such as ventricular fibrillation or certain tachyarrhythmias, for example. Implantable therapy systems make therapy/stimulus decisions in reliance upon the classification of the cardiac rhythm.
In an illustrative example, a detected event is detected by comparing received signals to a detection threshold, which is defined by a detection profile. Any suitable detection profile may be used. Detected events are separated by intervals. Several intervals can be used to generate an average interval across a selected number of intervals, from which cardiac rate can be calculated. For example, four, eight or sixteen intervals may be used to estimate cardiac event rate as a function of average interval.
A cardiac electrogram includes several portions (often referenced as “waves”) that, according to well known convention, are labeled with letters including P, Q, R, S, and T, each of which corresponds to particular physiological events. It is typical to design detection algorithms to sense the R-wave, though any portion of the cardiac cycle, if repeatedly detected, can be used to generate a beat rate. If morphology (shape) analysis is used in addition to heart rate, the system may capture and/or analyze the portion of the cycle that includes the Q, R and S waves, referred to as the QRS complex. Other portions of the patient's cardiac cycle, such as the P-wave and T-wave, are often treated as artifacts that are not sought for the purpose of estimating heart rate, though this need not be the case.
Typically, for purposes of ascertaining rate each cardiac cycle is counted only once. Overdetection (such as a double or triple detection) may occur if the device declares more than one detected event within a single cardiac cycle. Overdetection may occur if more than one portion of a single cardiac cycle is detected, or if noise causes an event to be declared when no cardiac event has taken place, for example, due to external therapy or noise, pacing artifact, skeletal muscle noise, electro-therapy, etc.
If one cardiac cycle takes place and a detection algorithm declares multiple detected events, overdetection has occurred. If the heart rate is then calculated by counting each of these detections, overcounting occurs. Calculated heart rates may be used alone or in combination with other factors to classify cardiac rhythms as malignant or benign. Overcounting in reliance on overdetected events can result in erroneously high rate calculation. Miscalculation of heart rate can lead to incorrect rhythm classification and therapy decisions. Some of these concepts are further discussed and developed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/399,914, titled METHODS AND DEVICES FOR ACCURATELY CLASSIFYING CARDIAC ACTIVITY, published as US Patent Application Publication Number 2009-0259271 and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/399,901, titled ACCURATE CARDIAC EVENT DETECTION IN AN IMPLANTABLE CARDIAC STIMULUS DEVICE, published as US Patent Application Publication Number 2009-0228057.
Next, the method performs an overdetection identification step 12. This may include one or more of several analysis methods including, as illustratively shown, morphology analysis 14, interval analysis 16 and wide QRS analysis 18. Following overdetection identification 12, if one or more overdetections are identified, the method corrects data, as shown at 20. If no data correction is needed at step 20, this step may be bypassed.
Finally, the method includes a therapy decision, as shown at 22. A therapy decision 22 may classify a cardiac rhythm of the implantee and determines whether/when therapy is to be delivered. The method then iterates to event detection 10.
The therapy decision 22 may include one or more of several forms of analysis. In one illustrative example, individual detected events are marked as shockable or non-shockable and an X-out-of-Y counter is maintained to determine whether the overall cardiac rhythm merits therapy. The marking of individual events as shockable or non-shockable may take several forms, including rate-based and/or morphology based determinations, or combinations thereof.
Therapy decision 22 may also take into account the persistence of a malignant condition. Some illustrative examples are shown in US Patent Application Publication Number 2006-0167503 titled METHOD FOR ADAPTING CHARGE INITIATION FOR AN IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATOR, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. Other methods may be used as a part of the therapy decision 22.
Electrodes are disposed at locations throughout the system including, for example, an electrode 44 on the canister 42, and electrodes 48, 50, 52 on lead 46. The electrodes 44, 48, 50, 52 may take any suitable form and can be made of any suitable material. For example, the canister electrode 44 may be an isolated button electrode or it may be a region or surface of the canister 42, and the electrodes 48, 50, 52 on lead 46 may be coil electrodes, ring electrodes, or other structures known in the art.
The electrodes 44, 48, 50, 52 define a plurality of sensing vectors such as V1, V2, V3 and V4. If desired, one or more vectors V1, V2, V3, and V4 may be chosen as a default sensing vector, for example, as discussed in US Patent Application Publication Number 2007-0276445 titled SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SENSING VECTOR SELECTION IN AN IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICE. Other uses of multiple vectors are shown, for example, in U.S. Pat. No. 7,392,085 titled MULTIPLE ELECTRODE VECTORS FOR IMPLANTABLE CARDIAC TREATMENT DEVICES. Another embodiment considers posture in vector analysis, for example, as discussed in US Patent Application Publication Number 2008-0188901 titled SENSING VECTOR SELECTION IN A CARDIAC STIMULUS DEVICE WITH POSTURAL ASSESSMENT. Multiple sensing vectors may be analyzed, sequentially or in combination, as desired.
Therapy may be applied using any chosen pair of electrodes. An illustrative example uses the can electrode 44 and the coil electrode 52 to apply therapy. Other electrode combinations may be used. Therapy may include monophasic or multiphasic defibrillation, cardioversion and/or pacing.
The present invention is not limited to any particular hardware, implant location or configuration. Instead, it is intended as an improvement upon any implantable cardiac therapy system. Some embodiments may also be used in a monitoring system to either control the monitoring functions (including annunciation and/or data recording) and/or to test the suitability of the data analysis to a particular configuration, condition or patient.
Some illustrative examples can associate with an external programmer 54 configured to communicate with the implanted device for various purposes, including, for example and without limitation, one or more of the following: device testing; upload new/revised software; modify programmable parameters such as detection or therapy settings; determine the status of device operation, battery life, or lead integrity; enable or disable functionality; and/or download data relating to the implantee's condition, prior data capture, or treatment. Any suitable communication method may be used, such as various protocols and hardware widely known in the art.
The present invention may also be embodied in systems having various implant configurations including, for example, other subcutaneous-only, vascular-only, and/or transvenous implantation configurations/locations. The canister 42 may be placed in anterior, lateral, and/or posterior positions including, without limitation, axillary, pectoral, and sub-pectoral positions, as well as placements on either the left or right side of the implantee's torso and/or in the abdomen. Entirely intravascular implantation of the system has also been proposed. The canister 42 and lead 46 may be placed in any of a number of suitable configurations including anterior-posterior combinations, anterior-only combinations, transvenous placement, or other vascular placements. A unitary system may omit lead 46 and instead include all electrodes on the canister 42.
The signal representation is compared to a template using correlation analysis 506. The template is shown as comprising a series of sample values {T1 . . . T9}. Prior to comparison, or as part of the comparison, the signal representation or template is scaled such that the largest peaks of the two data sets are equal in amplitude. One example of correlation analysis is correlation waveform analysis. Other examples are widely known in the art.
A simple version of correlation analysis is shown graphically in
Next a correlation score may be calculated as shown at 510. The sum of the absolute values of the differences between (scaled) samples of the signal representation and samples of the template is calculated and divided by the total area under the template. The quotient is subtracted from one, yielding a correlation score 512. If the correlation score is close to one, then the area of difference is small relative to the area under the template, indicating high correlation. Other methods for calculating correlation are known in the art and may be substituted; that shown in
Returning to
The signal 72 has R-waves and T-waves highlighted. In the example shown, the T-waves are large relative to the R-waves. The refractory periods shown in cross-hatching over both R-waves and T-waves indicates that each R-wave and each T-wave is being treated as a detected event. As a result, for each cardiac cycle, the detection profile 70 is detecting two events. This is one example of overdetection.
In the illustrative example, each of the individual detections is also being treated to correlation analysis relative to a template that is based on an R-wave. The results of the correlation analysis are plotted at 80. Plot 80 includes boundaries for “High” and “Low” correlation. In the example, each “X” indicates the correlation score for each detected event. A High-Low-High pattern of correlation scores occurs as shown at 82. In the example, each High-Low-High sequence leads to a conclusion that “Low” scoring detected events are overdetected. As a result, as shown, the “Low” scoring detected event will be discarded when a High-Low-High pattern is found. In a numeric example, “High” is defined as greater than 52% correlation, while “Low” is defined as less than 25% correlation, when calculated using the form shown at 510 in
For example, as shown at 96, a series of detections of R and T waves may result in a set of interval calculations of 225 ms (R to T) and 300 ms (T to R), which yields an average interval of 263 ms. An average interval of 263 milliseconds leads to a rate of about 229 beats-per-minute, which would be a treatable tachyarrhythmia in many patients. However, when the T-waves are identified as overdetections and the intervals on either side of the T-waves are combined, as shown at 98, the intervals average 525 milliseconds. The rate can be recalculated to about 114 beats-per-minute, avoiding possible defibrillation, cardioversion or pacing that could result without the data correction.
In the example shown in
If desired, fuzzy logic may be applied. The use of a “Middle Zone” suggests this. For example, rather than simple “High” and “Low” characterizations, additional categories may be provided. Further, a previous measurement may be used to inform a subsequent characterization of a marginally similar or dissimilar signal.
As shown at 100, a series of events N, N−1, N−2 and N−3 are considered as a group, with the Nth detection compared to each of N−1, N−2 and N−3 via correlation analysis. The results of inter-event comparisons and comparisons to a static template are shown in a table at 102. The inter-event comparison results are shown at 104, and include ordered results for comparison of a given event to three prior events. Table 102 shows results for events N, N−1, N−2 and N−3. The results of the inter-event comparisons show that for any given event X, the correlation to X−2 is higher than for X−1 or X−3. This may indicate a pattern of double detection based on increased correlation between alternating events.
In the illustrative example, comparisons to a static, normal sinus rhythm template may be performed as well. Illustrative results are shown at 106. The alternating static template results, Low-Middle-Low-Middle . . . are suggestive of possible overdetection, but because the likely R-waves do not Highly correlate, strong confidence does not result based on static template alone. However, when taken in combination with the inter-event comparison information, there is significant confidence that some events are overdetections. An applicable rule set may be as follows:
1) Alternating Low-High-Low for N when compared to N−1, N−2 and N−3, and
2) Alternating Low-High-Low for N−2 when compared to N−3, N−4 and N−5.
Conclusion: Treat N−1 and N−3 as T-waves.
A further, confirmatory rule may be:
3) At least “Medium” correlation for N and N−2 to static template.
Another approach is to apply only rules 1) and 3), while marking only the N−1 as an overdetection in response to the rule set being met. Once one or more events are marked as overdetections, they may be treated in the manner shown in
The results are shown in the table at 124. For each set of comparisons, there are three Low correlations, and one Middle or one High correlation. It is likely that with triple detection, some detections will have a low correlation in each comparison. An illustrative rule set is as follows:
1. Nth event has High correlation to the N−3 event;
2. N−1 and N−2 events have Low correlations to the Nth event; and
3. N−1 and N−2 events have Low correlations to the Static Template.
If these three conditions are met, then N−1 and N−2 may be discarded. Further conditions may be added. For example, the static template characteristics of N and/or N−3 may be considered as well, for example:
4. Nth and N−3 events have Middle or High Correlation to Static Template. Then if all of 1-4 are met, N−1 and N−2 may be discarded and the interval from N to N−3 calculated and used in rate analysis.
In a further example, the widths of each event may also be considered, for example using this fourth condition:
5. N−1 and N−2 events are wider than a Width Threshold.
The width threshold may be set as desired; in one example the Width Threshold is in the range of 100-140 ms. This Width Threshold rule may be applied as an added layer to any determination that an event is to be discarded as an overdetection. In another example, the polarities may be considered:
6. N−1 and N−2 each share the same polarity.
Polarity may be defined, for example, by reference to the majority of signal samples for an event, as the polarity of the sample having the greatest magnitude in the event, or by determination of which extreme, the most positive or least positive, in the event occurs first.
If desired, interval coupling may be added as another condition:
7. The combined interval N to N−3 less than Duration.
Where “Duration” is in the range of 800-1200 ms. This condition, and variants thereof, is also explained in association with
The wide band 148 is applied to identify an overdetection when there are two detected events with scores above line 144 separated by a single detected event with a score below line 146, for example as shown in
The narrower band 154 applies a less stringent standard than the wider band 152 with regard to the correlation scores, and therefore more events are analyzed before making a decision to discard low scoring events. In one illustrative example, events are not discarded using the narrow band 154 until the 8 event pattern shown in
The examples in FIGS. 6 and 7A-7B indicate numbers, with 50% and 20% correlations bordering the wide band 148 and 40% and 25% bordering the narrow band 154. These numbers are merely illustrative. In one example, these numbers are applied by scaling the formula shown at 510 in
In another embodiment, before any of the even numbered events are marked as overdetections, they are all analyzed to determine whether clustering of the even numbered events has taken place, again using the mean of those events. Rather than separation of the odd-numbered event mean from a low boundary, separation between the even and odd event means is calculated to establish groupings of the events. In this embodiment, overdetection markers are applied only when sufficient clustering of the even-numbered events appears.
In the example of
Instead of a static template, the analysis shown by
A further use of the inter-event comparisons shown here may be in the determination of whether a Shockable rhythm is occurring. Stimulus delivery is often used to address polymorphic conditions, such as Polymorphic Ventricular Tachycardia and Ventricular Fibrillation. Monomorphic conditions such as Monomorphic Ventricular Tachycardia (MVT) can be treated, but MVT does not always require the most energetic treatments. For example, MVT may be treated using anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) in place of defibrillation or cardioversion, as ATP uses less energy and may be less traumatic to the patient. Patterns of correlation can be used to distinguish monomorphic arrhythmias from polymorphic arrhythmias. For example, an ongoing pattern as shown in
In another example, a pattern as shown in
In one example, a system uses a tiered correlation analysis to identify treatable arrhythmias. In the example, a simple, single event correlation analysis using a static template is executed until a pattern as shown in
As noted in
When performing the shifting to the right and/or left, scaling of the signal to the template may be modified as well. For example, if scaling is initially performed by comparing the peak for the signal to the peak for the template and then equalizing the two, on shifting, the peak for the signal may instead be scaled to the point it aligns to in the template after shifting has occurred.
The method demonstrated in
In another embodiment highlighted in
Alignment to a sample 232 is then performed as shown at 244. The template is adjusted such that the positive and negative peaks are aligned with the captured signal, with a linear interpolation therebetween. Outside of the positive and negative peaks, the template continues to match the signal as shown at 230, however, the duration and slope between the positive and negative peaks are adjusted to match the captured event. The adjustment shown in
In another example, more than two template points are identified and linear interpolation may be used between them. For example, a template may be composed of five values each having a relative amplitude and relative location. When a detected event is to be compared to the template, the width and peak amplitude of the detected event are used to scale each of the values of the template, with linear interpolation between the template points.
As shown in
In another example, the order of analysis is reversed, and the overdetection analysis does not take place unless the calculated rate is high (often 150 bpm or more), or unless the intervals that could be affected are short enough to pass the applied test. In another embodiment, individual intervals are compared to a threshold (for example, in the range of 400-600 ms) and, if the individual intervals both exceed the threshold, then no interval combining occurs. In yet another example, the threshold may be a programmable parameter of an implantable system. In another example, the threshold may be scaled on the basis of a programmable VT parameter that is used to set a beat rate that the implantable system will treat as a ventricular tachycardia rate.
If the corrected interval is not longer than the threshold, the method continues to the step of combining intervals, as shown at 276, to correct for the overdetected event(s). If the corrected interval would be longer than the threshold at step 274, the method simply ends without combining intervals. In this fashion, unnecessary correction of the stored data can be avoided.
These “presumed” R and T waves from steps 302 and 304 are then used to apply a formula for calculating the QT length from the RR interval in step 306. In particular, several likely formulae are shown at 308. Examples include Bazett's formula:
QT(Exp)=QT*√{square root over (RR)}
Friderica's formula:
QT(Exp)=QT*{square root over (RR)}
And the Sagie et al. regression formula:
QT(Exp)=QT+A*(RR−1)
Sagie et al. found A=0.154.
In each formula, the expected QT is shown as QT(exp), the value RR is given in seconds, and the value QT is captured during a programming session between an implant and a programmer. QT is either captured at or adjusted for a 60 beat-per-minute cardiac rate. The RR interval is found at step 304, and the measured QT interval can be captured by adding the measured width of the presumed T-wave to the interval between the first R-wave and the presumed T-wave.
The expectation is that if the likely overdetected event is an overdetected T-wave, the measured QT period will match the expected QT value given RR, using whichever formula is applied, with some band allowing for error.
If the formula applied at 306 does not yield a match, no discard occurs, as shown at 310. Alternatively, if the formula applied at 306 yields a match, then the likely overdetection is discarded as shown at 312. When the likely overdetection is discarded at 312, intervals around the overdetection are combined, as shown above in
Referring to
Referring instead to
In the examples of
Next, detected events that pass waveform appraisal 404 undergo beat qualification 406, during which detected events are analyzed to determine whether they display morphology or interval characteristics that indicate accurate detection. This may include the correlation analyses shown above, and/or analysis of intervals or combinations of the two, for example analysis to eliminate wide complex double detection can use detected event proximity and shape characteristics to identify likely overdetections. Some further discussion appears in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/399,914, titled METHODS AND DEVICES FOR ACCURATELY CLASSIFYING CARDIAC ACTIVITY, and published as US Patent Application Publication Number 2009-0259271.
The architecture then turns to rhythm classification, which can begin by consideration of rate at block 408. If the rate is low, then an individual detection is marked as “Not Shockable” as indicated at 410. Alternatively, if the rate is very high, it is considered to indicate ventricular fibrillation (VF) and therefore is marked as “Shockable,” as shown at 412. Between these low and VF bands of rates is a ventricular tachycardia (VT) zone, and rates in the VT zone are analyzed using what will be referred to as Detection Enhancements, as shown at 414.
An example of a Detection Enhancement is as follows:
1. Compare to static template: If Match, not shockable; else
2. Compare to dynamic template: If no Match, shockable event; else
3. Compare to QRS width threshold: If wide, shockable, else not shockable.
Where the dynamic template can be any of the following:
The QRS width threshold noted above may be applied in various ways that can be tailored to the method of QRS width measurement used in a given system and/or that may be tailored to an individual patient. In one example, the following rules apply to QRS width:
Following the marking of events as Not Shockable 410 or Shockable 412, an X/Y counter condition is applied as indicated at 416. The X/Y counter condition analyzes the number of Shockable events, X, that are marked during a previous set, Y, of detected events that pass both waveform appraisal 404 and beat qualification 406. The ratio applied, and set size used, may vary. One embodiment applies an 18/24 X/Y counter condition at 416. Other embodiments use ratios as 8 or 9 out of 12, 12 or 13 out of 16, 24/32, etc.
If the X/Y condition is not met, no shock will be delivered, as shown at 418. If the X/Y condition is met, then the method may proceed to a charge confirmation block 420. For example, some embodiments require that the X/Y ratio/set size be met for a selected number of consecutive events, and this condition may be tested in charge confirmation 420. Another example condition is to determine whether a set, N, of immediately preceding detected events are all Shockable, or all have intervals that are sufficiently short to support a conclusion that the detected arrhythmia is ongoing. Other factors may also be applied in charge confirmation, for example, by observing whether overdetection has been recently noted (which may suggest that therapy should be delayed to ensure that the “arrhythmia” is not a manifestation of overcounting), or observing whether consistent long intervals have been detected (potentially suggesting spontaneous conversion to normal rhythm by the patient). For example, charge confirmation 420 may also include methods such as those shown in commonly assigned and copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/042,911, titled METHOD FOR ADAPTING CHARGE INITIATION FOR AN IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATOR, published as US Patent Application Publication Number 2006-0167503, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.
The Charge and Shock block 422 is reached if Charge Confirmation 420 is passed. Typically the process of charging takes some period of time, and so the method 400 may iterate several times before charging is completed. Some or all of the analysis used to reach an initial determination that Charging should start may be repeated during this process. Finally, if treatable conditions persist during charging, or are identified following charging, stimulus may be delivered.
With regard to the implantable system, various hardware features may be incorporated. For example, any suitable battery chemistry, such as a lithium ion battery, may be used. Therapy output can be created using a capacitive system to store energy until a stimulus level is reached using one or several capacitors. A charging circuit such as a flyback transformer circuit can be used to generate therapy voltages. Therapy can be delivered using, for example, an H-bridge circuit or a modification thereof. Dedicated or general purpose circuitry may be used to perform analysis functions. For example, a dedicated cardiac signal analog-to-digital circuit may be used, as well as a dedicated correlation analysis block, as desired, while other functions may be performed with a microcontroller. Static and dynamic memories may be provided and used for any suitable functions. These elements may all be components of the operational circuitry for the implantable cardiac stimulus system.
Those skilled in the art will recognize that the present invention may be manifested in a variety of forms other than the specific embodiments described and contemplated herein. Accordingly, departures in form and detail may be made without departing from the scope and spirit of the present invention.
The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/437,547, filed May 7, 2009 and published as US Patent Application Publication Number 2010-0004713, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,160,687, which claims the benefit of and priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/051,332, filed May 7, 2008 and titled METHODS AND DEVICES FOR IDENTIFYING AND CORRECTING OVERDETECTION OF CARDIAC EVENTS, and which is also a Continuation-In-Part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/399,914, filed Mar. 6, 2009, published as U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2009-0259271, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,160,686, and titled METHODS AND DEVICES FOR ACCURATELY CLASSIFYING CARDIAC ACTIVITY, the disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference. The present application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/399,901, filed Mar. 6, 2009 and titled ACCURATE CARDIAC EVENT DETECTION IN AN IMPLANTABLE CARDIAC STIMULUS DEVICE, published as US Patent Application Publication Number 2009-0228057, which claims the benefit of and priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/034,938, filed Mar. 7, 2008, the disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4184493 | Langer et al. | Jan 1980 | A |
4300567 | Kolenik et al. | Nov 1981 | A |
4407288 | Langer et al. | Oct 1983 | A |
4450527 | Sramek | May 1984 | A |
4457315 | Bennish | Jul 1984 | A |
4589420 | Adams et al. | May 1986 | A |
4595009 | Leinders | Jun 1986 | A |
4679144 | Cox et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4693253 | Adams | Sep 1987 | A |
4750494 | King | Jun 1988 | A |
4779617 | Whigham | Oct 1988 | A |
4940054 | Grevis et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4979110 | Albrecht et al. | Dec 1990 | A |
4989602 | Sholder et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
5000189 | Throne et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5105810 | Collins et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5117824 | Keimel et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5184616 | Weiss | Feb 1993 | A |
5193535 | Bardy et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5215098 | Steinhaus et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5217021 | Steinhaus et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5240009 | Williams | Aug 1993 | A |
5271411 | Ripley et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5273049 | Steinhaus et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5280792 | Leong et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5299119 | Kraf et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5313953 | Yomtov et al. | May 1994 | A |
5331966 | Bennett et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5339820 | Henry et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5342402 | Olson et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5342407 | Dahl et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5351696 | Riff et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5376104 | Sakai et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5400795 | Murphy et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5423326 | Wang et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5447519 | Peterson | Sep 1995 | A |
5464431 | Adams et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5470342 | Mann et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5486199 | Kim et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5513644 | McClure et al. | May 1996 | A |
5522852 | White et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5534019 | Paspa | Jul 1996 | A |
5545186 | Olson et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5558098 | Fain | Sep 1996 | A |
5564430 | Jacobson et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5607455 | Armstrong | Mar 1997 | A |
5620466 | Haefner et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5658317 | Haefner et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5676690 | Noren | Oct 1997 | A |
5685315 | McClure et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5702425 | Wickham | Dec 1997 | A |
5709215 | Perttu et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5755738 | Kim et al. | May 1998 | A |
5776168 | Gunderson | Jul 1998 | A |
5779645 | Olson et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5817134 | Greenhut et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5827197 | Bocek et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5857977 | Caswell et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5891048 | Nigam et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5991657 | Kim | Nov 1999 | A |
6029086 | Kim et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6041251 | Kim et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6047210 | Kim et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6052617 | Kim | Apr 2000 | A |
6058328 | Levine et al. | May 2000 | A |
6095987 | Shmulewitz et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6115628 | Stadler et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6144879 | Gray | Nov 2000 | A |
6148230 | Kenknight | Nov 2000 | A |
6223078 | Marcovecchio | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6230055 | Sun et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236882 | Lee et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6240313 | Esler | May 2001 | B1 |
6266554 | Hsu et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6280462 | Hauser et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6308095 | Hsu et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6334071 | Lu | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6377844 | Graen et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381493 | Stadler et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6393316 | Gillberg et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397100 | Stadler et al. | May 2002 | B2 |
6411844 | Kroll et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6438410 | Hsu et al. | Aug 2002 | B2 |
6449503 | Hsu | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6493579 | Gilkerson et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6493584 | Lu | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6505068 | Bonnet et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6516225 | Florio | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6561984 | Turcott | May 2003 | B1 |
6567691 | Stadler | May 2003 | B1 |
6574505 | Warren | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6575912 | Turcott | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6587720 | Hsu et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6625490 | McClure et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6643549 | Bradley et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6647292 | Bardy et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6684100 | Sweeney et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6699200 | Cao et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6708058 | Kim et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6708062 | Ericksen et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6721597 | Bardy et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6728572 | Hsu et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6731978 | Olson et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6745068 | Koyrakh et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6754528 | Bardy et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6889079 | Bocek et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6892092 | Palreddy et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6909916 | Spinelli et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6950702 | Sweeney | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7016730 | Ternes | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7020523 | Lu et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7027856 | Zhou et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7027858 | Cao et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7027862 | Dahl et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7031764 | Schwartz et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7062314 | Zhu et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7062315 | Koyrakh et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7062322 | Stadler et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7076289 | Sarkar et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7085599 | Kim et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7103412 | Kroll | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7117035 | Wagner et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7123954 | Narayan et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7149575 | Ostroff et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7162301 | Kim et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7167747 | Gunderson et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7184815 | Kim et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7184818 | Kim et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7191004 | Kim et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7194302 | Bardy et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7218966 | Haefner et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7236819 | Brockway et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7248921 | Palreddy et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7266409 | Gunderson | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7283863 | Gunderson et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7302294 | Kamath et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7330757 | Ostroff et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7346392 | KenKnight | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7376458 | Palreddy et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7379772 | Bardy et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7386342 | Falkenberg et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7392085 | Warren et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7444182 | Ostroff et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7447540 | Nabutovsky et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7467009 | Palreddy et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7477935 | Palreddy et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7496408 | Ghanem et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7496409 | Greenhut et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7499750 | Haefner et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7522959 | Hauser et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7546159 | Nabutovsky et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
7555335 | Kamath et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7559900 | Gillberg | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7567835 | Gunderson et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7570997 | Lovett et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7593771 | Yonce et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7623913 | Phillips | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7623916 | Julian | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7655014 | Ko et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7682316 | Anderson et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7684864 | Olson et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7715906 | Krause et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7734345 | Cinbis | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7761142 | Ghanem et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7774049 | Ghanem et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7783354 | Gunderson | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7792571 | Sweeney et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7797036 | Zhang et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7801594 | Higham | Sep 2010 | B1 |
7865233 | Haefner | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7894894 | Stadler et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7904142 | Kim et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7904153 | Greenhut et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7907993 | Ghanem et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
20030204215 | Gunderson et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040049120 | Cao et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040215239 | Favet et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040215240 | Lovett et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040220628 | Wagner | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040230229 | Lovett et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050107838 | Lovett et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050131464 | Heinrich et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050154421 | Ousdigian et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20060116595 | Palreddy et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060116725 | Palreddy et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060122676 | Ko | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060167502 | Haefner | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060167503 | Warren et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060167504 | Warren et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060235476 | Gunderson | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060241701 | Markowitz et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070032829 | Ostroff | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070049975 | Cates et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070135847 | Kenknight | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070142736 | Cazares et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070156190 | Cinbis | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070179539 | Degroot et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070179540 | Stegemann et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070232944 | Ghanem et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070232945 | Kleckner et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070232948 | Stadler et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070233198 | Ghanem et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070276445 | Sanghera et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080015647 | Palreddy et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080077030 | Ostroff et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080086174 | Libbus et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080091242 | Kamath et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080132965 | Ostroff et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080161870 | Gunderson | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080172098 | Gunderson | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080183085 | Van Oort et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080188901 | Sanghera et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080215110 | Gunderson | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080221632 | Bardy et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080228093 | Dong et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080243200 | Scinicariello et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080262559 | Zhang et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080275516 | Ghanem et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080275517 | Ghanem et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080275519 | Ghanem et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080275521 | Warren et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080288009 | Kim et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090036788 | Nabutovsky et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090043352 | Brooke et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090054796 | Sanghera et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090054938 | Ostroff et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090093731 | Palreddy et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090156957 | Linder et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157128 | Seim et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157132 | Linder et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157137 | Gilkerson et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090187227 | Palreddy et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090228057 | Allavatam et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090240157 | Lian et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090240300 | Lian et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090259271 | Allavatam et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100004713 | Warren et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100094369 | Allavatam et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100152798 | Sanghera et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100152799 | Sanghera et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100185109 | Zhang et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100331904 | Warren et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110098585 | Warren et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110098775 | Allavatam et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20130006085 | Allavatam et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1819855 | Aug 2006 | CN |
1829554 | Sep 2006 | CN |
1915166 | Feb 2007 | CN |
1985750 | Jun 2007 | CN |
101065059 | Oct 2007 | CN |
0554208 | Aug 1993 | EP |
2455132 | May 2012 | EP |
WO-2004105871 | Dec 2004 | WO |
WO-2009111764 | Sep 2009 | WO |
WO-2009111764 | Sep 2009 | WO |
WO-2009111766 | Sep 2009 | WO |
WO-2009111766 | Sep 2009 | WO |
WO-2009137726 | Nov 2009 | WO |
WO-2009137726 | Nov 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,901, Final Office Action mailed Apr. 11, 2013”, 11 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,901, Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 17, 2012”, 44 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,901, Response filed Apr. 6, 2012 to Restriction Requirement mailed Mar. 6, 2012”, 25 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,901, Response filed Dec. 17, 2012 to Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 17, 2012”, 16 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,901, Restriction Requirement mailed Mar. 6, 2012”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,914, Non-Final Office Action mailed Oct. 21, 2011”, 34 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,914, Notice of Allowance mailed Feb. 14, 2012”, 5 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,914, Response filed Oct. 7, 2011 to Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 9, 2011”, 11 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,914, Response received Jan. 13, 2012 to Non-Final Office Action mailed Oct. 21, 2011”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/399,914, Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 9, 2011”, 6 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/437,547, Non-Final Office Action mailed Nov. 10, 2011”, 34 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/437,547, Notice of Allowance mailed Feb. 15, 2012”, 5 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/437,547, Response filed Jan. 27, 2012 to Non-Final Office Action mailed Nov. 10, 2011”, 6 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/437,547, Response filed Oct. 10, 2011 to Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 9, 2011”, 12 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/437,547, Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 9, 2011”, 5 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/637,438, Non-Final Office Action mailed Dec. 7, 2011”, 34 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/637,438, Notice of Allowance mailed May 16, 2012”, 5 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/637,438, Response filed Feb. 29, 2012 to Non-Final Office Action mailed Dec. 7, 2011”, 11 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/637,438, Response filed Nov. 18, 2011 to Restriction Requirement mailed Oct. 21, 2011”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/637,438, Restriction Requirement mailed Oct. 21, 2011”, 7 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/436,398, Restriction Requirement mailed Mar. 15, 2013”, 6 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/607,168, Non Final Office Action mailed Mar. 26, 2013”, 7 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/607,168, Response filed Mar. 14, 2013 to Restriction Requirement mailed Feb. 27, 2013”, 6 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/607,168, Restriction Requirement mailed Feb. 27, 2013”, 5 pgs. |
“Chinese Application Serial No. 200980116877.4, Office Action mailed Jan. 30, 2013”, w/English translation, 17 pgs. |
“Chinese Application Serial No. 200980116886.3, Office Action mailed Dec. 13, 2012”, w/English Translation, 16 pgs. |
“Chinese Application Serial No. 200980125869.6, Office Action mailed Jan. 10, 2013”, (With English Translation), 12 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 09717667.1, Office Action mailed Dec. 16, 2011”, 4 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 09717667.1, Response filed Apr. 26, 2012 to Office Action mailed Dec. 16, 2011”, 44 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 09717991.5, Office Action mailed Dec. 16, 2011”, 4 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 09717991.5, Response filed Apr. 26, 2012 to Office Action mailed Dec. 16, 2011”, 41 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 09743712.3, Office Action mailed Jun. 8, 2011”, 3 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 09743712.3, Response filed Aug. 10, 2011 to Office Action mailed Jun. 8, 2011”, 9 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151591.0, European Search Report mailed Mar. 21, 2012”, 6 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151591.0, Response filed Oct. 26, 2012 to European Search Report mailed Mar. 21, 2012”, 10 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151593.6, European Search Report mailed Mar. 21, 2012”, 7 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151593.6, Response filed Oct. 26, 2012 to European Search Report mailed Mar. 21, 2012”, 13 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151595.1, European Search Report mailed Mar. 21, 2012”, 6 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151595.1, Response filed Oct. 26, 2012 to European Search Report mailed Mar. 21, 2012”, 9 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12189307.7, Extended European Search Report mailed Mar. 1, 2013”, 6 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12189311.9, Extended European Search Report mailed Mar. 1, 2013”, 6 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036432, International Report on Patentability mailed Sep. 22, 2009”. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036432, International Search Report mailed Sep. 22, 2009”, 5 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036432, International Written Opinion mailed Sep. 7, 2010”, 11 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036434, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Sep. 7, 2010”, 14 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036434, International Search Report mailed Sep. 22, 2009”, 7 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/036434, International Written Opinion mailed Sep. 7, 2010”, 13 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/043213, International Report on Patentability mailed Nov. 9, 2010”, 13 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/043213, International Search Report mailed Dec. 1, 2009”, 7 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/043213, International Written Opinion mailed Nov. 7, 2010”, 12 pgs. |
“Methods and Devices for Identifying and Correcting Overdetection of Cardiac Events”, U.S. Appl. No. 61/051,332, filed May 7, 2008, 62 pgs. |
“QT Interval”, Wikipedia, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QT—interval>, (Accessed May 11, 2011), 5 pgs. |
Gunderson, et al., “An Algorithm to Predict Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Lead Failure”, JACC, vol. 44, No. 9,, (Nov. 2004), 1898-902. |
Olson, Walter, et al., “Onset and Stability for Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia Detection in an Implantable Pacer-Cardioverter-Defibrillator”, IEEE, (1987), 167-170. |
Schuder, John C, “The Role of an Engineering Oriented Medical Research Group in Developing Improved Methods & Devices for Achieving Ventricular Defibrillation: The University of Missouri Experience”, PACE vol. 16, Part I,, (Jan. 1993), 95-124. |
Schwake, “Komplikationen mit Sonden bei 340 Patienten mit einem implantierbaren Kardioverter/Defibrilator”, Z Kardiol 88, (1999), 559-565. |
Swerdlow, C. D, et al., “Advanced ICD Troubleshooting: Part I.”, accessed and printed Jul. 7, 2009, indicates publication Jan. 9, 2006 (publication date not confirmed)., [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/520588—print>, (Accessed Jul. 7, 2009), 1322-46. |
Throne, Robert D, et al., “A Comparison of Four New Time-Domain Techniques for Discriminating Monomorphic Ventricular Tachycardia from Sinus Rhythm Using Ventricular Waveform Morphology”, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol. 38, No. 6, (Jun. 1991), 561-570. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 13/436,398, Non Final Office Action mailed May 9, 2013”, 6 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151591.0, Office Action mailed Dec. 19, 2012”, 5 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151593.6, Office Action mailed May 7, 2012”, 2 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151593.6, Office Action mailed Dec. 19, 2012”, 5 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 12151593.6, Response filed Apr. 19, 2013 to Office Action mailed Dec. 19, 2012”, 8 pgs. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120197334 A1 | Aug 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61051332 | May 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12437547 | May 2009 | US |
Child | 13436448 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12399914 | Mar 2009 | US |
Child | 12437547 | US |