Timing of the upper limit of vulnerability is different for monophasic and biphasic shocks: Implications for the determination of the defibrillation threshold

PACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

Volumn 20, Issue 9 I, 1997, Pages 2179-2187

  Behrens, Steffen ^a   Li, Cuilan ^a   Franz, Michael R ^a,b  

^a GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Biphasic waveform; Monophasic waveform; Upper limit of vulnerability

Indexed keywords

ACTION POTENTIAL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEFIBRILLATION; DEFIBRILLATOR; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; MALE; MEASUREMENT; RABBIT; T WAVE;

ACTION POTENTIALS; ANIMALS; CARDIAC PACING, ARTIFICIAL; ELECTRIC COUNTERSHOCK; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; HEART CONDUCTION SYSTEM; MALE; RABBITS; TIME FACTORS; VENTRICULAR FIBRILLATION;

EID: 0030886819     PISSN: 01478389     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1997.tb04234.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Hoffman BF, Gorin EF, Wax FF, et al. Vulnerability to fibrillation and the ventricular excitability curve. Am J Physiol 1951; 167:88-94.
2. Chen PS, Shibata N, Dixon EG, et al. Comparison of the defibrillation threshold and the upper limit of ventricular vulnerability. Circulation 1986; 73:1022-1028.
3. Chen PS, Shibata N, Dixon EG, et al. Activation during ventricular defibrillation in open-chest dogs. Evidence of complete cessation and regeneration of ventricular fibrillation after unsuccessful shocks. J Clin Invest 1986; 77:810-823.
4. Ideker RE, Chen PS, Zhou XH. Basic mechanisms of defibrillation. J Electrocardiol 1990; 23:36-38.
5. Chen PS, Feld GK, Mower MM, et al. Effects of pacing rate and timing of defibrillation shock on the relation between the defibrillation threshold and the upper limit of vulnerability in open chest dogs. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 18:1555-1563.
6. Topham SL, Cha YM, Peters BB, et al. Effects of lidocaine on relation between defibrillation threshold and upper limit of vulnerability in open-chest dogs. Circulation 1992; 85:1146-1151.
7. Souza JJ, Malkin RA, Ideker RE. Comparison of upper limit if vulnerability and defibrillation probability of success curves using a nonthoracotomy lead system. Circulation 1995; 91:1247-1252.
8. Malkin RA, Idriss SF, Walker RG, et al. Effect of rapid pacing and T-wave scanning on the relation between the defibrillation and upper-limit-of-vulnerability dose-response curves. Circulation 1995; 92:1291-1299.
9. Chen PS, Feld GK, Kriett JM, et al. Relation between upper limit of vulnerability and defibrillation threshold in humans. Circulation 1993; 88:186-192.
10. Hwang C, Swerdlow C, Kass R, et al. Upper limit of vulnerability reliably predicts the defibrillation threshold in humans. Circulation 1994; 90: 2308-2314.
11. Swerdlow CD, Ahern T, Kass RM, et al. Upper limit of vulnerability permits accurate determination of defibrillation safety margin in humans with a single episode of ventricular fibrillation. (abstract) Circulation 1995; 92:1-27.
12. Swartz JF, Karasik PE, Bacon ME, et al. Relationship of upper limit of vulnerability to defibrillation threshold for monophasic and biphasic wave-form human nonthoracotomy defibrillation. (abstract) J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23:293A.
13. Bacon ME, Vitullo RN, Kasell JH, et al. Upper limit of vulnerability and its relationship to defibrillation threshold in humans. (abstract) PACE 1992; 15:530.
14. Stanton MS, Mehra R, Morris J, et al. Relationship between defibrillation threshold and upper limit of vulnerability in humans. (abstract) PACE 1992; 15:563.
15. Fabritz CL, Kirchhof PF, Behrens S, et al. Myocardial vulnerability to T wave shocks. Relation to shock strength, shock coupling interval, and dispersion of ventricular repolarization. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1996; 7:231-242.
16. Shibata N, Chen PS, Dixon EG, et al. Influence of shock strength and timing on induction of ventricular arrhythmias in dogs. Am J Physiol 1988; 255:H891-H901.
17. Kates RE, Yee YG, Hill I. Effect of albumin on the electrophysiologic stability of isolated perfused rabbit hearts. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1989; 13:168-172.
18. Franz MR, Burkhoff D, Spurgeon H, et al. In vitro validation of a new cardiac catheter technique for recording monophasic action potentials. Eur Heart J 1986; 7:34-41.
19. Zabel M, Portnoy S, Franz MR. Electrocardiographic indexes of dispersion of ventricular repolarization: An isolated heart validation study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 25:746-752.
20. Merillat JC, Lakatta EG, Hano O, et al. Role of calcium and the calcium channel in the initiation and maintenance of ventricular fibrillation. Circ Res 1990; 67:1115-1123.
21. MacConaill M. Ventricular fibrillation thresholds in Langendorff perfused rabbit hearts: All or none effect of low potassium concentration. Cardiovasc Res 1987; 21:463-468.
22. Brugada J, Boersma L, Kirchhof C, et al. Proarrhythmic effects of flecainide. Experimental evidence for increased susceptibility to reentrant arrhythmias. Circulation 1991; 84:1808-1818.
23. Jones DL, Klein GJ, Gulamhusein S, et al. The repetitive ventricular response: Relationship to ventricular fibrillation threshold in dogs. PACE 1983; 6:1258-1267.
24. Wharton JM, Richard VJ, Murry CE, et al. Electrophysiological effects of monophasic and biphasic stimuli in normal and infarcted dogs. PACE 1990; 13:1158-1172.
25. Daubert JP, Frazier DW, Wolf PD, et al. Response of relatively refractory canine myocardium to monophasic and biphasic shocks. Circulation 1991; 84:2522-2538.
26. Zhou XH, Knisley SB, Wolf PD, et al. Prolongation of repolarization time by electric field stimulation with monophasic and biphasic shocks in open-chest dogs. Circ Res 1991; 68:1761-1767.
27. Fan W, Gotoh M, Chen PS. Upper limit of vulnerability tested on or before the peak of T wave predicts defibrillation threshold in dogs. (abstract) J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23:293A.
28. Winkle RA, Mead RH, Ruder MA, et al. Improved low energy defibrillation efficacy in man with the use of a biphasic truncated exponential waveform. Am Heart J 1989; 117:122-127.