Average current is better than peak current as therapeutic dosage for biphasic waveforms in a ventricular fibrillation pig model of cardiac arrest

Resuscitation

Volumn 85, Issue 10, 2014, Pages 1399-1404

  Chen, Bihua ^a   Yu, Tao ^b   Ristagno, Giuseppe ^c   Quan, Weilun ^d   Li, Yongqin ^a  

^a THIRD MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b SUN YAT SEN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^c MARIO NEGRI INSTITUTE FOR PHARMACOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (Italy)

^d ZOLL Medical Corporation   (United States)

Author keywords

Average current; Cardiac arrest; Peak current; Shock success; Ventricular fibrillation

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEFIBRILLATION; DEFIBRILLATOR; DOMESTIC ANIMAL; ELECTRIC CURRENT; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; ELECTRIC SHOCK; ENERGY; EXPERIMENTAL PIG; HEART ARREST; HEART VENTRICLE FIBRILLATION; IMPEDANCE; MALE; NONHUMAN; WAVEFORM; ANIMAL; CARDIOVERSION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DISEASE MODEL; PIG; PROCEDURES; VENTRICULAR FIBRILLATION;

ANIMALS; DISEASE MODELS, ANIMAL; ELECTRIC COUNTERSHOCK; HEART ARREST; MALE; SUS SCROFA; SWINE; VENTRICULAR FIBRILLATION;

EID: 84907695209     PISSN: 03009572     EISSN: 18731570     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.06.029     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Nichol G., Thomas E., Callaway C.W., et al. Regional variation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest incidence and outcome. JAMA 2008, 300:1423-1431.
2. Sasson C., Rogers M.A., Dahl J., Kellermann A.L. Predictors of survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2010, 3:63-81.
3. Link M.S., Atkins D.L., Passman R.S., et al. Part 6: electrical therapies: automated external defibrillators, defibrillation, cardioversion, and pacing: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation 2010, 122:S706-S719.
4. Deakin C.D., Nolan J.P., Sunde K., Koster R.W. European Resuscitation Council guidelines for resuscitation 2010 section 3. Electrical therapies: automated external defibrillators, defibrillation, cardioversion and pacing. Resuscitation 2010, 81:1293-1304.
5. Kerber R.E., Martins J.B., Kienzle M.G., et al. Energy, current, and success in defibrillation and cardioversion: clinical studies using an automated impedance-based method of energy adjustment. Circulation 1988, 77:1038-1046.
6. Lerman B.B., DiMarco J.P., Haines D.E. Current-based versus energy-based ventricular defibrillation: a prospective study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988, 12:1259-1264.
7. Dalzell G.W., Cunningham S.R., Anderson J., Adgey A.A. Initial experience with a microprocessor controlled current based defibrillator. Br Heart J 1989, 61:502-505.
8. Wesley R.C., Morgan D., Zimmerman D. Limitations of the countershock dose response: a study of transthoracic current. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1991, 14:1855-1859.
9. Kerber R.E., Kieso R.A., Kienzle M.G., et al. Current-based transthoracic defibrillation. Am J Cardiol 1996, 78:1113-1138.
10. Fotuhi P.C., Epstein A.E., Ideker R.E. Energy levels for defibrillation: what is of real clinical importance?. Am J Cardiol 1999, 83:24D-33D.
11. Ristagno G., Yu T., Quan W., et al. Current is better than energy as predictor of success for biphasic defibrillatory shocks in a porcine model of ventricular fibrillation. Resuscitation 2013, 84:678-683.
12. Li Y., Ristagno G., Yu T., et al. A comparison of defibrillation efficacy between different impedance compensation techniques in high impedance porcine model. Resuscitation 2009, 80:1312-1317.
13. Tang W., Weil M.H., Sun S., et al. The effects of biphasic waveform design on post-resuscitation myocardial function. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 43:1228-1235.
14. Li Y., Wang H., Cho J.H., et al. Comparison of efficacy of pulsed biphasic waveform and rectilinear biphasic waveform in a short ventricular fibrillation pig model. Resuscitation 2009, 80:1047-1051.
15. Bourland J.D., Tacker W.A., Geddes L.A. Strength-duration curves for trapezoidal waveforms of various tilts for transchest defibrillation in animals. Med Instrum 1978, 12:38-41.
16. Shorofsky S.R., Foster A.H., Gold M.R. Effect of waveform tilt on defibrillation thresholds in humans. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1997, 8:496-501.
17. Boriani G., Edvardsson N., Biffi M., et al. Plateau waveform shape allows a much higher patient shock energy tolerance in AF patients. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2007, 18:728-734.
18. Natale A., Sra J., Krum D., et al. Relative efficacy of different tilts with biphasic defibrillation in humans. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1996, 19:197-206.
19. Kroll M.W., Swerdlow C.D. Optimizing defibrillation waveforms for ICDs. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2007, 18:247-263.
20. Walsh S.J., Manoharan G., Escalona O.J., et al. Novel rectangular biphasic and monophasic waveforms delivered by a radiofrequency-powered defibrillator compared with conventional capacitor-based waveforms in transvenous cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. Europace 2006, 8:873-880.
21. Glover B.M., McCann C.J., Manoharan G., et al. A pilot study of a low-tilt biphasic waveform for transvenous cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: improved efficacy compared with conventional capacitor-based waveforms in patients. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2008, 31:1020-1024.
22. Darragh K.M., Manoharan G., Di Maio R., et al. A low tilt waveform in the transthoracic defibrillation of ventricular arrhythmias during cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2012, 83:1438-1443.
23. Babbs C.F., Tacker W.A., VanVleet J.F., Bourland J.D., Geddes L.A. Therapeutic indices for transchest defibrillator shocks: effective, damaging, and lethal electrical doses. Am Heart J 1980, 99:734-738.
24. Malkin R.A., Herre J.M., McGowen L., et al. A four-shock Bayesian up-down estimator of the 80% effective defibrillation dose. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1999, 10:973-980.
25. Hsia H.H., Chia K.K.M., Evans J.C. Defibrillation threshold: testing upper limit of vulnerability, and methods for reduction. Cardiac Electrophysiol Clin 2011, 3:473-492.
26. Matula M.H., Brooks M.J., Pan Q., Pless B.D., Province R.A., Echt D.S. Biphasic waveforms for ventricular defibrillation: optimization of total pulse and second phase durations. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1997, 20:2154-2162.
27. Tang A.S., Yabe S., Wharton J.M., Dolker M., Smith W.M., Ideker R.E. Ventricular defibrillation using biphasic waveforms: the importance of phasic duration. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989, 13:207-214.
28. Shan Y., Ristagno G., Fuller M., et al. The effects of phase duration on defibrillation success of dual time constant biphasic waveforms. Resuscitation 2010, 81:236-241.
29. Wang J., Weil M.H., Tang W., Chang Y.T., Huang L. A comparison of electrically induced cardiac arrest with cardiac arrest produced by coronary occlusion. Resuscitation 2007, 72:477-483.
30. Niemann J.T., Rosborough J.P., Youngquist S., Thomas J., Lewis R.J. Is all ventricular fibrillation the same? A comparison of ischemically induced with electrically induced ventricular fibrillation in a porcine cardiac arrest and resuscitation model. Crit Care Med 2007, 35:1356-1361.
31. Dixon E.G., Tang A.S.L., Wolf P.D., et al. Improved defibrillation thresholds with large contoured epicardial electrodes and biphasic waveforms. Circulation 1987, 76:1176-1184.
32. Davy J.M., Fain E.S., Dorian P., et al. The relationship between successful defibrillation and delivered energy in open-chest dogs: reappraisal of the defibrillation threshold concept. Am Heart J 1987, 13:77-84.