Improved low energy defibrillation efficacy in man with the use of a biphasic truncated exponential waveform

First human safety and effectiveness study of defibrillation with a novel patch wearable cardioverter-defibrillator

AIMS

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCDs) are indicated in patients at risk of sudden cardiac arrest who are not immediate candidates for implantable defibrillator therapy. Limitations of existing WCDs include poor compliance and high false alarm rates. The Jewel is a novel patch-WCD (P-WCD) that addresses these limitations with an adhesive-based design for near-continuous wear and a machine learning algorithm designed to minimize inappropriate detections. This was a first-in-human study of the Jewel P-WCD conducted in an electrophysiology (EP) lab to determine the safety and effectiveness of the device in terminating ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) with a single shock. The aim was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of terminating VT/VF with a single shock using the Jewel P-WCD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a first-in-human, prospective, single-arm, single-centre study in patients scheduled for an EP procedure in which VT/VF was expected to either spontaneously occur or be induced. The Jewel P-WCD was placed on consented patients; upon confirmation of VT/VF, a single shock (150 J) was delivered via the device. A group sequential design and Pocock alpha spending function was used to measure the observed proportion of successful VT/VF single-shock terminations. The endpoint was achieved if the lower confidence limit exceeded the performance goal of 62%, using a one-sided lower 97.4% exact confidence bound. Of 18 eligible subjects, 16 (88.9%, 97.4% confidence bound: 65.4%) were successfully defibrillated with a single shock, exceeding the primary endpoint performance goal with no adverse events.

CONCLUSION

This first-in-human evaluation of the Jewel P-WCD demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of terminating VT/VF.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT05490459.

Development of the Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: JACC Historical Breakthroughs in Perspective

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) represent transformational technology, arguably the most significant advance in cardiovascular medicine in 50 years. The vision and determination of pioneers Mirowski and Mower was fundamental to this monumental achievement, working with limited resources and confronted by skepticism/criticism from medical establishment. The inventors were followed >35 years in which a multitude of innovative clinical scientists and engineers introduced technological advances leading to the sophisticated devices in practice today. A pivotal patient experiment with automated termination of ventricular fibrillation (1980) led to U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval. Transvenous lead systems converted ICDs from thoracotomy-based secondary prevention to primary prevention of sudden death devices in countless patients worldwide. ICD acceptance was solidified by prospective randomized controlled trials showing reduced mortality superior to antiarrhythmic drugs. ICDs eventually expanded from coronary disease to inherited arrhythmia conditions (eg, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy). The ICD breakthrough story demonstrates how significant progress is possible in medicine against all odds, given fearless imagination to pursue novel ideas that conflict with accepted wisdom.

Electrical Stimulation for Low-Energy Termination of Cardiac Arrhythmias: a Review

Cardiac arrhythmias are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the developed world, estimated to be responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths annually. Our understanding of the electrophysiological mechanisms of such arrhythmias has grown since they were formally characterized in the late nineteenth century, and this has led to the development of numerous devices and therapies that have markedly improved outcomes for patients affected by such conditions. Despite these advancements, the application of a single large shock remains the clinical standard for treating deadly tachyarrhythmias. Such defibrillating shocks are undoubtedly effective in terminating such arrhythmias; however, they are applied without forewarning, contributing to the patient's stress and anxiety; they can be intensely painful; and they can have adverse psychological and physiological effects on patients. In recent years, there has been interest in developing defibrillation protocols that can terminate arrhythmias without crossing the human pain threshold for energy delivery, generally estimated to be between 0.1 and 1 J. In this article, we review existing literature on the development of such low-energy defibrillation methods and their underlying mechanisms, in an attempt to broadly describe the current landscape of these technologies.

History and perspectives of the defibrillation

History of the discovery of fibrillation and defibrillation, stages of the development of the concept of defibrillation are described in the article. The differences in mechanisms of different types of defibrillation are given here. The modern state of defibrillation and future trends are discussed in our article.

Interaction of defibrillation waveform with the time to defibrillation or the number of defibrillation attempts on survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

AIM

Early biphasic defibrillation is effective in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) cases. In the resuscitation of patients with OHCA, it is not clear how the defibrillation waveform interacts with the time to defibrillation to influence patient survival. The second, and any subsequent, shocks need to be administered by an on-line physician in Japan. Thus, we investigated the interaction between the defibrillation waveform and time to or the number of defibrillation on resuscitation outcomes.

METHODS

This prospective observational study used data for all OHCAs that occurred between 2005 and 2014 in Japan. To investigate the interaction effect between the defibrillation waveform and the time to defibrillation or the number of defibrillations on the return to spontaneous circulation (ROSC), 1-month survival, and cerebral performance category (CPC) (1, 2), we assessed the modifying effects of the defibrillation waveform and the time to or the number of defibrillation on additive scale (i.e., the relative excessive risk due to interaction, RERI) and multiplicative scale (i.e., ratio of odds ratios (ORs)).

RESULTS

In total, 71,566 cases met the inclusion criteria. For the measure of interaction between the defibrillation waveform and the time to defibrillation, ratio of ORs for ROSC was 0.84 (0.75-0.94), implying that the effect of time to first defibrillation on ROSC was negatively modified by defibrillation waveform. For the interaction between the defibrillation waveform and the number of defibrillations, RERI and ratio of ORs for CPC (1, 2) was -0.25 (-0.47 to -0.06) and 0.79 (0.67-0.93), respectively. It is implied that the effect of number of defibrillation on CPC (1, 2) was negatively modified by defibrillation waveform.

CONCLUSIONS

An increased number of defibrillations was associated with a decreased ROSC in the case of biphasic and monophasic defibrillation, while an increased number of defibrillations was related to an increased 1-month survival rate and CPC (1, 2) only in the case of biphasic defibrillation. When two or more defibrillations were performed, a biphasic waveform was more effective in terms of long-term survival than a monophasic waveform.

A multicenter prospective randomized study comparing the efficacy of escalating higher biphasic versus low biphasic energy defibrillations in patients presenting with cardiac arrest in the in-hospital environment

Background

Biphasic defibrillation has been practiced worldwide for >15 years. Yet, consensus does not exist on the best energy levels for optimal outcomes when used in patients with ventricular fibrillation (VF)/pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT).

Methods

This prospective, randomized, controlled trial of 235 adult cardiac arrest patients with VF/VT was conducted in the emergency and cardiology departments. One group received low-energy (LE) shocks at 150–150–150 J and the other escalating higher-energy (HE) shocks at 200–300–360 J. If return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was not achieved by the third shock, LE patients crossed over to the HE arm and HE patients continued at 360 J. Primary end point was ROSC. Secondary end points were 24-hour, 7-day, and 30-day survival.

Results

Both groups were comparable for age, sex, cardiac risk factors, and duration of collapse and VF/VT. Of the 118 patients randomized to the LE group, 48 crossed over to the HE protocol, 24 for persistent VF, and 24 for recurrent VF. First-shock termination rates for HE and LE patients were 66.67% and 64.41%, respectively (P=0.78, confidence interval: 0.65–1.89). First-shock ROSC rates were 25.64% and 29.66%, respectively (P=0.56, confidence interval: 0.46–1.45). The 24-hour, 7-day, and 30-day survival rates were 85.71%, 74.29%, and 62.86% for first-shock ROSC LE patients and 70.00%, 50.00%, and 46.67% for first-shock ROSC HE patients, respectively. Conversion rates for further shocks at 200 J and 300 J were low, but increased to 38.95% at 360 J.

Conclusion

First-shock termination and ROSC rates were not significantly different between LE and HE biphasic defibrillation for cardiac arrest patients. Patients responded best at 150/200 J and at 360 J energy levels. For patients with VF/pulseless VT, consideration is needed to escalate quickly to HE shocks at 360 J if not successfully defibrillated with 150 or 200 J initially.

A shocking past: a walk through generations of defibrillation development

Defibrillation is one of the most successful and widely recognized applications of electrotherapy. Yet the historical road to its first successful application in a patient and the innovative adaptation to an implantable device is marred with unexpected turns, political and personal setbacks, and public and scientific condemnation at each new idea. Driven by dedicated scientists and ever-advancing creative applications of new technologies, from electrocardiography to high density mapping and computational simulations, the field of defibrillation persevered and continued to evolve to the life-saving tool it is today. In addition to critical technological advances, the history of defibrillation is also marked by the plasticity of the theory of defibrillation. The advancing theories of success have propelled the campaign for reducing the defibrillation energy requirement, instilling hope in the development of a painless and harmless electrical defibrillation strategy.

Shock-induced termination of reentrant cardiac arrhythmias: comparing monophasic and biphasic shock protocols

In this article, we compare quantitatively the efficiency of three different protocols commonly used in commercial defibrillators. These are based on monophasic and both symmetric and asymmetric biphasic shocks. A numerical one-dimensional model of cardiac tissue using the bidomain formulation is used in order to test the different protocols. In particular, we performed a total of 4.8 × 10(6) simulations by varying shock waveform, shock energy, initial conditions, and heterogeneity in internal electrical conductivity. Whenever the shock successfully removed the reentrant dynamics in the tissue, we classified the mechanism. The analysis of the numerical data shows that biphasic shocks are significantly more efficient (by about 25%) than the corresponding monophasic ones. We determine that the increase in efficiency of the biphasic shocks can be explained by the higher proportion of newly excited tissue through the mechanism of direct activation.

Comparison of outcomes after use of biphasic or monophasic defibrillators among out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients: a nationwide population-based observational study

BACKGROUND

The use and popularity of the biphasic waveform defibrillator as a replacement for the monophasic waveform defibrillator are increasing, but it is unclear whether this can improve the rate of survival among out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. This study aimed to verify the hypothesis that the outcome of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients who received defibrillation shock with the biphasic waveform defibrillator was better than that of patients who received defibrillation shock with the monophasic defibrillator.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This prospective, nationwide, population-based, observational study included 21 172 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with initial ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2007. Defibrillation shock was performed by monophasic defibrillator on 8224 (39%) patients and by biphasic defibrillator on 12 948 (61%) patients. The rate of survival at 1 month with minimal neurological impairment was 11.6% (951/8192) in the monophasic defibrillator group and 12.8% (1653/12 928) in the biphasic defibrillator group. Hierarchical logistic regression analysis using a generalized estimation equation showed no significant difference between the biphasic and monophasic groups in 1-month survival with minimal neurological impairment (adjusted odds ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.26; P=0.42). Confirmatory propensity score analyses showed similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Although monophasic defibrillators are being replaced by biphasic defibrillators, our nationwide population-based observational study failed to demonstrate a statistically significant association between defibrillation waveform and 1-month survival rate with minimal neurological impairment.

Successful external cardioversion of atrial fibrillation in patients referred to an electrophysiologist for internal cardioversion

BACKGROUND

Internal cardioversion of atrial fibrillation with direct current energy has become an increasingly employed technique for patients who fail external cardioversion.

HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to determine whether internal cardioversion could be avoided by careful attention to cardioversion technique in a group of patients referred specifically for internal cardioversion after failed external cardioversion by community cardiologists.

METHODS

We performed external cardioversion utilizing two operators applying significant pressure to the thorax with up to 360 J prior to the planned internal cardioversion in 20 patients referred for internal cardioversion after failed attempts at external cardioversion.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients (80%) were successfully cardioverted and avoided the risk, inconvenience, and cost of internal cardioversion.

CONCLUSION

External cardioversion with significant anterior paddle pressure by two operators can decrease the need for internal cardioversion in a significant portion of patients referred to electrophysiologists for internal cardioversion and should be considered prior to an invasive procedure.

Electrical and pharmacologic cardioversion for atrial fibrillation

In this article, electrical and pharmacologic cardioversion for atrial fibrillation is described in detail. Indications for cardioversion and management of pericardioversion anticoagulation also are discussed. Finally, management strategies for immediate recurrence of atrial fibrillation and cardioversion failure are offered.

"Tuned" Defibrillation Waveforms Outperform 50/50% Tilt Defibrillation Waveforms: A Randomized Multi-Center Study

INTRODUCTION

A superior performance of a tuned waveform based on duration using an assumed cardiac membrane time constant of 3.5 ms and of a 50/50% tilt waveform over a standard 65/65% tilt waveform has been documented before. However, there has been no direct comparison of the tuned versus the 50/50% tilt waveforms.

METHODS

In 34 patients, defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) for tuned versus 50/50% tilt waveforms in a random order were measured by using the optimized binary search method. High voltage lead impedance was measured and used to select the pulse widths for tuned and 50/50% tilt defibrillation waveforms.

RESULTS

Delivered energy (7.3 +/- 4.6 J vs 8.7 +/- 5.3 J, P = 0.01), stored energy (8.2 +/- 5.1 J vs 9.7 +/- 5.6 J, P = 0.01), and delivered voltage (405.9 +/- 121.7 V vs 445.0 +/- 122.6 V, P = 0.008) were significantly lower for the tuned than for the 50/50% tilt waveform. In four patients with DFT >/= 15 J, the tuned waveform lowered the mean energy DFT by 2.8 J and mean voltage DFT by 45 V. For all patients, the mean peak delivered energy DFT was reduced from 29 J to 22 J (24% decrease). Multiple regression analysis showed that a left ventricular ejection fraction < 20% is a significant predictor of this advantage.

CONCLUSION

Energy and voltage DFTs are lowered with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator that uses a tuned waveform compared to a standard 50% tilt biphasic waveform.

The Gurvich waveform has lower defibrillation threshold than the rectilinear waveform and the truncated exponential waveform in the rabbit heart

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator studies have established the superiority of biphasic waveforms over monophasic waveforms. However, external defibrillator studies of biphasic waveforms are not as widespread. Our objective was to compare the defibrillation efficacy of clinically used biphasic waveforms, i.e., truncated exponential, rectilinear, and quasi-sinusoidal (Gurvich) waveforms in a fibrillating heart model. Langendorff-perfused rabbit hearts (n = 10) were stained with a voltage-sensitive fluorescent dye, Di-4-ANEPPS. Transmembrane action potentials were optically mapped from the anterior epicardium. We found that the Gurvich waveform was significantly superior (p < 0.05) to the rectilinear and truncated exponential waveforms. The defibrillation thresholds (mean +/- SE) were as follows: Gurvich, 0.25 +/- 0.01 J; rectilinear-1, 0.34 +/- 0.01 J; rectilinear-2, 0.33 +/- 0.01 J; and truncated exponential, 0.32 +/- 0.02 J. Using optically recorded transmembrane responses, we determined the shock-response transfer function, which allowed us to predict the cellular response to waveforms at high accuracy. The passive parallel resistor-capacitor model (RC-model) predicted polarization superiority of the Gurvich waveform in the myocardium with a membrane time constant (taum) of less than 2 ms. The finding of a lower defibrillation threshold with the Gurvich waveform in an in vitro model of external defibrillation suggests that the Gurvich waveform may be important for future external defibrillator designs.

Prospective, randomized comparison of two biphasic waveforms for the efficacy and safety of transthoracic biphasic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a difference in commercially available biphasic waveforms.

BACKGROUND

Although the superiority of biphasic over monophasic waveforms for external cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF) is established, the relative efficacy of available biphasic waveforms is less clear.

METHODS

We compared the effectiveness of a biphasic truncated exponential (BTE) waveform and a biphasic rectilinear (BR) waveform for external cardioversion of AF. Patients (N = 188) with AF were randomized to receive transthoracic BR shocks (50, 75, 100, 120, 150, 200 J) or BTE shocks (50, 70, 100, 125, 150, 200, 300, 360 J). Shock strength was escalated until success or maximum energy dose was achieved. If maximum shock strength failed, patients received the maximum shock of the opposite waveform. Analysis included 141 patients (71 BR, 70 BTE; mean age 66.5 +/- 13.7. Forty-seven randomized patients were excluded because of flutter on precardioversion ECG upon blinded review (n = 25), presence of intracardiac thrombus (n = 7), or protocol deviation (n = 15). Groups were similar with regard to clinical and echocardiographic characteristics.

RESULTS

The success rate was similar for the two waveforms (93% BR vs 97 BTE, P = .44), although cumulative selected and delivered energy was less in the BTE group. Only AF duration was significantly different between successful and unsuccessful patients. No significant complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Biphasic waveforms were very effective in transthoracic cardioversion of AF, and complication rates were low. No significant difference in efficacy was observed between BR and BTE waveforms. Impedance was not an important determinant of success for either biphasic waveform.

Comparative efficacy of monophasic and biphasic waveforms for transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter

BACKGROUND

Transthoracic cardioversion fails to restore sinus rhythm in 6% to 33% of patients with atrial fibrillation. This study sought to determine the relative efficacy of biphasic waveforms compared with monophasic waveforms in the treatment of atrial arrhythmias.

METHODS

A total of 912 patients underwent 1022 transthoracic cardioversions between May 2000 and December 2001. A monophasic damped sine waveform was used in the first 304 cases, and a rectilinear biphasic defibrillator was used in the next 718 cases.

RESULTS

Use of a biphasic waveform was associated with 94% success in conversion to sinus rhythm compared with 84% with a monophasic waveform (P < .001). The cumulative energy required to restore sinus rhythm was lower with biphasic shocks in both atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter groups (554 +/- 413 J for monophasic vs 199 +/- 216 J for biphasic shocks in the atrial fibrillation group, P < .001; 251 +/- 302 J vs 108 +/- 184 J, respectively, in the atrial flutter group, P < .001). In a multivariate analysis, use of a biphasic shock was associated with a 3.9-fold increase in success of cardioversion.

CONCLUSION

When used to cardiovert atrial arrhythmias, the rectilinear biphasic waveform was associated with higher success rates and lower cumulative energies than the monophasic damped sine waveform.

Automated external defibrillators: safety and efficacy in children and adolescents

Although children do not suffer from ventricular fibrillation (VF) as frequently as adults, it does occur in 10% to 20% of pediatric cardiac arrests. The technology is available to recognize and treat ventricular fibrillation in children as quickly as we can for adults. This article discusses the evidence to support automated external defibrillator use in young children. As this technology gains increased acceptance, resuscitation rates and outcomes for VF in children should approach those that are seen in adults.

Body weight does not affect defibrillation, resuscitation, or survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest treated with a nonescalating biphasic waveform defibrillator

BACKGROUND

This is a study of the influence of body weight on defibrillation, resuscitation, and survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest treated with a nonescalating impedance-compensating 150-J biphasic waveform defibrillator.

METHODS

Cardiac arrest data from Rochester, MN, emergency medical services over a 6-yr period was retrospectively analyzed. Patient weight data were available for 62 of the 68 patients who were treated initially by basic life support personnel and who presented with a shockable rhythm. For each defibrillation and resuscitation outcome variable, we tested for differences in body weight for successful vs. unsuccessful outcome.

RESULTS

Initial shocks defibrillated 92% (83% to 97%) of patients. Cumulative success with two shocks was 98% (confidence interval, 92% to 100%) and with three shocks was 100% (confidence interval, 95% to 100%). The mean shock impedance was 90 +/- 21 ohms. The average body weight was 84 +/- 17 kg (minimum, 53 kg; maximum, 135 kg) and was normally distributed. Based on the body mass index for 46 patients, approximately 41% were classified as overweight (body mass index, > or = 25), 24% obese (body mass index, > or = 30), and 4% extremely obese (body mass index, > or = 40). The remaining 31% were classified as normal or underweight. First-shock success, cumulative success through two shocks, and cumulative success through the first-shock series were unrelated to body weight, as were basic life support restoration of spontaneous circulation, prehospital restoration of spontaneous circulation, hospital admission, and discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Overweight patients were defibrillated by the biphasic waveform used in this study at high rates, with a fixed energy of 150 J, and without energy escalation.

Surgical Open-Chest Ventricular Defibrillation:. Triphasic Waveforms Are Superior to Biphasic Waveforms

Triphasic shocks have been evaluated for endocardial defibrillation but not for open-chest epicardial defibrillation. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of biphasic versus triphasic shocks for epicardial defibrillation in a porcine model. Twenty-two adult swine (18-28 kg) were deeply anesthetized and intubated. After 30 seconds electrically induced VF, each pig received truncated exponential biphasic (7.2-ms positive pulse duration and 7.2-ms negative pulse duration, total waveform duration 14.4 ms) and triphasic (4.8/4.8/4.8 ms, total waveform duration 14.4 ms) epicardial shocks. Pigs in group 1 (n = 11) received epicardial biphasic and triphasic shocks from large hand held paddle electrodes (44.2 cm2); pigs in group 2 (n = 11) received shocks from small paddle electrodes (15.9 cm2). Shocks were given at five selected energy levels (3-30 J) in random sequence. Four shocks were delivered at each energy level to construct an energy versus percentage of success curve. In group 1 (large paddle electrodes), percentage of shock success was significantly higher for triphasic shocks at the energy levels of 3, 5, 10, and 20 J compared to biphasic shocks. In group 2 (small paddle electrodes), triphasic shocks yielded a significantly higher percentage of shock success than biphasic shocks at the energy levels of 5, 10, and 20 J). Shock induced ventricular tachycardia was similar for both waveforms; asystole was rare. For open-chest defibrillation, triphasic waveform shocks were superior to biphasic waveform shocks for VF termination at energy levels of 3-20 J and were as safe as biphasic shocks.

A randomized trial comparing monophasic and biphasic waveform shocks for external cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

We compared efficacy of and pain felt after biphasic truncated exponential (BTE) and monophasic damped sine (MDS) shocks in patients undergoing external cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

Patients with AF were randomized to BTE or MDS waveform cardioversion. Successive shocks were delivered at 70, 100, 200, and 360 J until successful cardioversion, with one 360 J attempt of the alternate waveform when all 4 shocks failed. Success was determined by blinded over-read of electrocardiograms. Peak current was calculated from energy and impedance. Patients rated their pain at 1 and 24 hours after cardioversion.

RESULTS

Fourteen of 37 (38%) patients treated with MDS and 34 of 35 (97%) treated with BTE shocks were cardioverted at < or =200 J (P <.0001). Success rates of MDS versus BTE shocks were 5.4% versus 60% for 70 J, 19% versus 80% for < or =100 J, and 86% versus 97% for < or =360 J. BTE shocks cardioverted with less peak current (14.0 +/- 4.3 vs 39.5 +/- 11.2 A, P <.0001), less energy (97 +/- 47 vs 278 +/- 120 J, P <.0001), and less cumulative energy (146 +/- 116 vs 546 +/- 265 J, P <.0001). Patients felt less pain after BTE than MDS shocks at 1 hour (P <.0001) and 24 hours (P <.0001) after cardioversion.

CONCLUSION

This BTE waveform is superior to the MDS waveform for cardioversion of AF, requiring much less energy and current, and causing less postprocedural pain.

Clinical efficacy of a wearable defibrillator in acutely terminating episodes of ventricular fibrillation using biphasic shocks

The Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator (WCD) automatically detects and treats ventricular tachyarrhythmias without the need for assistance from a bystander, while at the same time allowing the patient to ambulate freely. It represents an alternative to emergency medical services for outpatient populations with a temporary risk of sudden cardiac death. While the original devices used a monophasic truncated exponential waveform for cardioversion/defibrillation shocks, a new, biphasic shock was developed for the next device generation. In 12 patients undergoing electrophysiological testing for ventricular tachyarrhythmias, termination of electrically induced ventricular fibrillation (VF) was attempted via the WCD. In 22 episodes, induced VF was promptly terminated by the first 70 J (n=12) or 100 J (n=10) biphasic shocks. Time between arrhythmia initiation and shock delivery was 22 +/- 6 seconds (70 J) and 21 +/- 6 seconds (100 J) (P=NS). The measured transthoracic impedance was 71 +/- 5 Ohms (64-79 Ohms) for the 70 J shock and 64 +/- 8 Ohms (47-72 Ohms) for the 100 J shock. The present study demonstrates that a single low energy biphasic shock delivered by the WCD, reliably terminates electrically induced VF (100% of episodes). The results of this study suggest that there is an acceptable safety margin to the maximum output of the device (150 J). Despite our promising data, we recommend that programming all shocks for maximum energy output should be done when using the WCD in ambulatory patients.

Biphasic versus monophasic cardioversion in shock-resistant atrial fibrillation:

Biphasic versus Monophasic Cardioversion.

INTRODUCTION

Cardioversion of atrial fibrillation using monophasic transthoracic shocks occasionally is ineffective. Biphasic cardioversion requires less energy than monophasic cardioversion, but its efficacy in shock-resistant atrial fibrillation is unknown. Thus, we compared the efficacy of cardioversion using biphasic versus monophasic waveform shocks in patients with atrial fibrillation previously refractory to monophasic cardioversion.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifty-six patients with prior failed monophasic cardioversion were randomized to either a 360-J monophasic damped sinusoidal shock or biphasic truncated exponential shocks at 150 J, followed by 200 J and then 360 J, if necessary. If either waveform failed, patients were crossed over to the other waveform. The primary endpoint was defined as the proportion of patients achieving sinus rhythm following initial randomized therapy. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression examined independent predictors of shock success, including patient age, sex, left atrial diameter, body mass index, drug therapy, and waveform. Twenty-eight patients were randomized to the biphasic shocks and 28 to the monophasic shocks. Sinus rhythm was restored in 61% of patients with biphasic versus 18% with monophasic shocks (P = 0.001). Seventy-eight percent success was achieved in patients who crossed over to the biphasic shock after failing monophasic cardioversion, whereas only 33% were successfully cardioverted with a monophasic shock after crossover from biphasic shock (P = 0.02). Overall, 69% of patients who received a biphasic shock at any point in the protocol were cardioverted successfully, compared to 21% with the monophasic shock (P < 0.0001). The type of shock was the strongest predictor of shock success (P = 0.0001) in multivariate logistic regression.

CONCLUSION

An ascending sequence of 150-, 200-, and 360-J transthoracic biphasic cardioversion shocks are successful more often than a single 360-J monophasic shock. Thus, biphasic shocks should be the recommended configuration of choice for all cardioversions.

Open-chest epicardial "surgical" defibrillation: biphasic versus monophasic waveform shocks

The aim of the study was to compare biphasic versus monophasic shocks for open-chest epicardial defibrillation. Transthoracic biphasic waveform shocks require less energy to terminate ventricular fibrillation compared to monophasic waveform shocks. However, if biphasic shocks are effective for open-chest epicardial ("surgical") defibrillation has not been established. Twenty-eight anesthetized adult swine (15-25 kg) underwent a midline sternotomy. Ventricular fibrillation was electrically induced. After 15 seconds of ventricular fibrillation, each pig in group 1 (n = 16) randomly received damped sinusoidal monophasic epicardial shocks and truncated exponential biphasic epicardial shocks from large (44.2 cm2) paddle electrodes at eight energy levels (2-50 J). Pigs in group 2 (n = 12) received monophasic and truncated exponential biphasic shocks from small (15.9 cm2) paddle electrodes. In group 1 (large paddle electrodes), the overall percent shock success rose from 15 +/- 9% at 2 J to 97 +/- 3% at 50 J. In this group there was no significant difference in percent of shock success between damped sinusoidal monophasic and biphasic waveform shocks. In group 2 (small paddle electrodes), biphasic shocks yielded a significantly higher percent of shock success than monophasic shocks at mid-energy levels from 7 to 20 J (all P < 0.01). With small surgical paddle electrodes, biphasic waveform shocks demonstrated a significantly higher percent of shock success rate compared to monophasic waveform shocks. With large paddle electrodes, the two waveforms were equally effective.

Defibrillation threshold and cardiac responses using an external biphasic defibrillator with pediatric and adult adhesive patches in pediatric-sized piglets

Before recommendations for using an automatic external defibrillator on pediatric patients can be made, a protocol for the energy of a biphasic waveform energy dosing needs to be determined that will allow ventricular defibrillation of 8 year olds while causing only a minimal amount of cardiac damage to infants. Pediatric- and adult-sized electrode patches were alternately applied to 10 isoflurane-anesthetized piglets weighing 3.8-20.1 kg to approximate the body weights of newborns to children < 8 years old. The defibrillation threshold (DFT) was determined for biphasic truncated exponential waveform shocks. Additional shocks, varying from the DFT to 360 Joules (J), were delivered during sinus rhythm or following 30 s of ventricular fibrillation (VF). The DFT was 2.4+/-0.81 and 2.1+/-0.65 J/kg for pediatric and adult patches, respectively (P = N.S.). The change in left ventricular (LV) dP/dt from baseline as a function of shock strength was significantly different at 1 and 10 s after shocks of increasing energy that were delivered in sinus rhythm, and 1, 10, 20, and 30 s after defibrillation shocks. There was no significant difference in LV dP/dt with increasing shock energy at 60 s with either patch size. The time to return of sinus rhythm, ST-segment deviation, and cardiac output were also not significantly different from baseline 60 s following shocks of up to 360 J delivered during sinus rhythm or VF with either patch. The same amount of energy delivered with a biphasic external defibrillator successfully defibrillated VF whether adult or pediatric patches were used. Cardiac rhythm and hemodynamic variables were unaltered at 60 s after shocks delivered at energies of up to 360 J. These data suggest that there is a substantial safety margin above a DFT strength shock for this biphasic waveform in piglets.

Biphasic waveform external defibrillation thresholds for spontaneous ventricular fibrillation secondary to acute ischemia

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to determine if the defibrillation threshold (DFT) after spontaneous ventricular fibrillation (VF) secondary to acute ischemia differs from the DFT for electrically induced VF in the absence of ischemia in anesthetized, closed-chest dogs and pigs.

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of external defibrillators has been tested mainly in animals and humans using E-VF, yet external defibrillators are often used in patients to halt S-VF.

METHODS

Protocol 1: biphasic truncated exponential (BTE) waveform shocks were delivered through electrodes placed in an anterior-anterior (A-A) position (left and right lateral thorax) in nine dogs. After measuring the E-VF DFT, acute ischemia was induced with an angioplasty balloon in either the left anterior descending or left circumflex coronary artery, and the S-VF DFT was determined. Protocol 2: in a group of 12 pigs, the E-VF DFT and S-VF DFT were determined for electrodes in the A-A position and in the anterior-posterior position (A-P). Protocol 3: the E-VF DFT was determined in seven pigs. Then up to three shocks 1.5x the E-VF DFT were delivered to S-VF. If defibrillation did not occur, a step-up protocol was used until defibrillation occurred.

RESULTS

Protocol 1: the DFT for E-VF was 65 +/- 28 J (mean +/- SD) compared with 226 +/- 97 J for S-VF, p < 0.05. Protocol 2: the DFT was 152 +/- 58 J for E-VF and 315 +/- 123 J for S-VF for A-A electrodes. The DFT was 100 +/- 43 J for E-VF and 206 +/- 114 J for S-VF for A-P electrodes. Protocol 3: 11/37 shocks of strength 1.5x E-VF DFT (182 +/- 40 J) stopped the arrhythmia. The episodes of S-VF not halted by these shocks required energy levels of up to 400 J for defibrillation.

CONCLUSIONS

External defibrillation of S-VF induced by acute ischemia requires significantly more energy than VF induced by 60-Hz current in the absence of ischemia. A safety margin >1.5x the DFT for electrically induced VF may be necessary in BTE external defibrillators to defibrillate S-VF.

Bench to bedside: resuscitation from prolonged ventricular fibrillation

Ventricular fibrillation (VF) remains the most common cardiac arrest heart rhythm. Defibrillation is the primary treatment and is very effective if delivered early within a few minutes of onset of VF. However, successful treatment of VF becomes increasingly more difficult when the duration of VF exceeds 4 minutes. Classically, successful cardiac arrest resuscitation has been thought of as simply achieving restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). However, this traditional approach fails to consider the high early post-cardiac arrest mortality and morbidity and ignores the reperfusion injuries, which are manifest in the heart and brain. More recently, resuscitation from cardiac arrest has been divided into two phases; phase I, achieving ROSC, and phase II, treatment of reperfusion injury. The focus in both phases of resuscitation remains the heart and brain, as prolonged VF remains primarily a two-organ disease. These two organs are most sensitive to oxygen and substrate deprivation and account for the vast majority of early post-resuscitation mortality and morbidity. This review focuses first on the initial resuscitation (achieving ROSC) and then on the reperfusion issues affecting the heart and brain.

Effects of biphasic vs monophasic defibrillation on the scaling exponent in a swine model of prolonged ventricular fibrillation

OBJECTIVE

Mathematical analyses of ventricular fibrillation (VF) have resulted in the derivation of a measure termed the scaling exponent (ScE) that characterizes the duration of VF and probability of defibrillation success. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of biphasic defibrillation waveform (BDW) and monophasic defibrillation waveform (MDW) rescue shocks on ScE in a swine model of prolonged VF.

METHODS

Utstein guidelines for the laboratory study of cardiopulmonary resuscitation were followed. Twenty mixed-breed domestic swine (mass range 20.5-26.8 kg) were instrumented and randomized to receive either MDW or BDW rescue shocks. Ventricular fibrillation was induced and untreated for a nonintervention interval of 8 minutes. Rescue shocks were delivered at 8, 10, and 12 minutes of elapsed VF time. The energy sequence for the three MDW shocks was 70, 100, and 150 J (approximately 3, 4, and 6 J/kg). All BDW shocks were delivered at 50 J (approximately 2.5 J/kg). Only VF was shocked. Chest compressions and drugs were not provided. Rhythm analysis and ScE calculation were performed offline. Continuous and discontinuous linear regression models were fit to plots of ScE vs time. Defibrillation success and progression of ScE slope were analyzed using Fisher's exact test, paired t-tests, and repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups. Successful termination of VF occurred on the first rescue shock in 1 of 10 (10%) in the MDW group and 3 of 10 (30%) in the BDW group; this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.58). No other defibrillation successes were observed. No animals achieved return of spontaneous circulation. The ScE values during the protocol progressed from 1.330 (95% CI = 1.287 to 1.373) to 1.724 (95% CI = 1.603 to 1.845) for MDW and 1.338 (95% CI = 1.261 to 1.415) to 1.639 (95% CI = 1.530 to 1.745) for BDW. Both groups showed a trend toward increasing ScE values with successive rescue shocks. Repeated-measures ANOVA using both continuous and discontinuous models demonstrated no difference in overall ScE slope progression between study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Mode of defibrillation waveform (BDW vs MDW) does not appear to impact ScE trends. Additional studies must be performed to better evaluate the clinical implications of this finding.

Biphasic and monophasic transthoracic defibrillation in pigs with acute left ventricular dysfunction

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to compare biphasic versus monophasic shock success for VF termination in a porcine model of acute left ventricular (LV) dysfunction.

BACKGROUND

For the termination of ventricular fibrillation (VF), transthoracic biphasic waveform shocks achieve higher success rates than monophasic shocks. However, the effectiveness of biphasic versus monophasic defibrillation in a setting of left ventricular dysfunction has not been reported.

METHODS

In 23 open-chest adult swine (15-25 kg), LV dysfunction [> or =25% decline in cardiac output (CO)] was induced by continuous inhalation of halothane (1-1.75%). Each pig randomly received transthoracic biphasic and monophasic shocks at three energy levels (30, 50 and 100 J) in two conditions: baseline and LV dysfunction. Halothane effect on left ventricular size and contraction was measured by echocardiography in three additional swine.

RESULTS

With halothane, pigs demonstrated a decline in CO (baseline 4.16+/-0.19, halothane 2.72+/-0.19 l/min, P<0.01), mean arterial pressure (baseline 107.2+/-3.5, halothane 80.1+/-3.4 mmHg, P<0.01) and increased left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (baseline 6.4+/-0.9, halothane 12.7+/-0.8 mmHg, P<0.01). LV diameters increased and fractional shortening fell. During baseline, biphasic shocks achieved significantly greater success (termination of VF) compared to monophasic waveforms (100 J: biphasic 83.3+/-9.5 versus monophasic 38.9+/-9.5%, P<0.01; 50 J: biphasic 67.1+/-8.8 versus monophasic 11.8+/-5.7%, P<0.01; 30 J: biphasic: 31.9+/-6.4 versus monophasic 0+/-0%, P<0.01). The superiority of the biphasic waveform to terminate VF was retained during LV dysfunction at all energy levels (100 J: biphasic 78.3+/-7.3 versus monophasic 37.5+/-8.1%, P<0.01; 50 J: biphasic 65.5+/-11.5 versus monophasic 11.7+/-5.9%, P<0.01; 30 J: biphasic: 40.6+/-8.0 versus monophasic 3.1+/-3.1%, P<0.01). Within both waveforms, there were no significant differences in percent shock success at any energy level comparing baseline with LV dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

In this porcine model of acute LV dysfunction, biphasic waveform shocks were not only superior to monophasic waveform shocks for termination of VF during baseline, but retained superiority to monophasic waveform shocks when LV dysfunction was present.

Multicenter study of principles-based waveforms for external defibrillation

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The efficacy of a shock waveform for external defibrillation depends on the waveform characteristics. Recently, design principles based on cardiac electrophysiology have been developed to determine optimal waveform characteristics. The objective of this clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy of principles-based monophasic and biphasic waveforms for external defibrillation.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, blinded, multicenter study of 118 patients undergoing electrophysiologic testing or receiving an implantable defibrillator was conducted. Ventricular fibrillation was induced, and defibrillation was attempted in each patient with a biphasic and a monophasic waveform. Patients were randomly placed into 2 groups: group 1 received shocks of escalating energy, and group 2 received only high-energy shocks.

RESULTS

The biphasic waveform achieved a first-shock success rate of 100% in group 1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 95.1% to 100%) and group 2 (95% CI 94.6% to 100%), with average delivered energies of 201+/-17 J and 295+/-28 J, respectively. The monophasic waveform demonstrated a 96.7% (95% CI 89.1% to 100%) first-shock success rate and average delivered energy of 215+/-12 J for group 1 and a 98.2% (95% CI 91.7% to 100%) first-shock success rate and average delivered energy of 352+/-13 J for group 2.

CONCLUSION

Using principles of electrophysiology, it is possible to design both biphasic and monophasic waveforms for external defibrillation that achieve a high first-shock efficacy.

Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of 150-J biphasic shocks compared with 200- to 360-J monophasic shocks in the resuscitation of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victims. Optimized Response to Cardiac Arrest (ORCA) Investigators

BACKGROUND

In the present study, we compared an automatic external defibrillator (AED) that delivers 150-J biphasic shocks with traditional high-energy (200- to 360-J) monophasic AEDs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

AEDs were prospectively randomized according to defibrillation waveform on a daily basis in 4 emergency medical services systems. Defibrillation efficacy, survival to hospital admission and discharge, return of spontaneous circulation, and neurological status at discharge (cerebral performance category) were compared. Of 338 patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, 115 had a cardiac etiology, presented with ventricular fibrillation, and were shocked with an AED. The time from the emergency call to the first shock was 8.9+/-3.0 (mean+/-SD) minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

The 150-J biphasic waveform defibrillated at higher rates, resulting in more patients who achieved a return of spontaneous circulation. Although survival rates to hospital admission and discharge did not differ, discharged patients who had been resuscitated with biphasic shocks were more likely to have good cerebral performance.

A comparison of biphasic and monophasic shocks for external defibrillation. Physio-Control Biphasic Investigators

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The ability of a shock to defibrillate the heart depends on its waveform and energy. Past studies of biphasic truncated exponential (BTE) shocks for external defibrillation focused on low energy levels. This prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial compared the first-shock efficacies of 200-joule (J) BTE, 130-J BTE, and 200-J monophasic damped sine wave shocks.

METHODS

Ventricular fibrillation (VF) was induced in 115 patients during evaluation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator function and 39 patients during electrophysiologic evaluation of ventricular arrhythmias. After 19 +/- 10 seconds of VF, a randomized transthoracic shock was administered. Mean first-shock success rates of the three groups were compared using a "Tukey-like" statistical test, adjusting for multiple comparisons. Blood pressures and arterial oxygen saturations were measured before VF induction and 30, 90, and 150 seconds after successful defibrillation.

RESULTS

First-shock success rates were 61/68 (90%) for 200-J monophasic, 39/39 (100%) for 200-J biphasic, and 39/47 (83%) for 130-J biphasic shocks. The 200-J biphasic shocks were simultaneously superior in first-shock efficacy to both 200-J monophasic and 130-J biphasic shocks (experimentwise error rate, alpha < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the efficacies of 200-J monophasic and 130-J biphasic shocks, nor was there any significant difference between the three groups in hemodynamic parameters after successful shocks.

CONCLUSIONS

Biphasic shocks of 200 J provide better first-shock defibrillation efficacy for short-duration VF than 200-J monophasic and 130-J biphasic shocks and thus may allow earlier termination of VF in cardiac arrest patients.

Transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: comparison of rectilinear biphasic versus damped sine wave monophasic shocks

BACKGROUND

Clinical studies have shown that biphasic shocks are more effective than monophasic shocks for ventricular defibrillation. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of a rectilinear biphasic waveform with a standard damped sine wave monophasic waveform for the transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this prospective, randomized, multicenter trial, patients undergoing transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation were randomized to receive either damped sine wave monophasic or rectilinear biphasic shocks. Patients randomized to the monophasic protocol (n=77) received sequential shocks of 100, 200, 300, and 360 J. Patients randomized to the biphasic protocol (n=88) received sequential shocks of 70, 120, 150, and 170 J. First-shock efficacy with the 70-J biphasic waveform (60 of 88 patients, 68%) was significantly greater than that with the 100-J monophasic waveform (16 of 77 patients, 21%, P<0.0001), and it was achieved with 50% less delivered current (11+/-1 versus 22+/-4 A, P<0.0001). Similarly, the cumulative efficacy with the biphasic waveform (83 of 88 patients, 94%) was significantly greater than that with the monophasic waveform (61 of 77 patients, 79%; P=0.005). The following 3 variables were independently associated with successful cardioversion: use of a biphasic waveform (relative risk, 4.2; 95% confidence intervals, 1.3 to 13.9; P=0.02), transthoracic impedance (relative risk, 0.64 per 10-Omega increase in impedance; 95% confidence intervals, 0.46 to 0.90; P=0.005), and duration of atrial fibrillation (relative risk, 0.97 per 30 days of atrial fibrillation; 95% confidence intervals, 0.96 to 0.99; P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

For transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation, rectilinear biphasic shocks have greater efficacy (and require less energy) than damped sine wave monophasic shocks.

Comparison of a novel rectilinear biphasic waveform with a damped sine wave monophasic waveform for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation. ZOLL Investigators

OBJECTIVES

We compared the efficacy of a novel rectilinear biphasic waveform, consisting of a constant current first phase, with a damped sine wave monophasic waveform during transthoracic defibrillation.

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have shown that for endocardial defibrillation, biphasic waveforms have a greater efficacy than monophasic waveforms. More recently, a 130-J truncated exponential biphasic waveform was shown to have equivalent efficacy to a 200-J damped sine wave monophasic waveform for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation. However, the optimal type of biphasic waveform is unknown.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, multicenter trial, 184 patients who underwent ventricular defibrillation were randomized to receive a 200-J damped sine wave monophasic or 120-J rectilinear biphasic shock.

RESULTS

First-shock efficacy of the biphasic waveform was significantly greater than that of the monophasic waveform (99% vs. 93%, p = 0.05) and was achieved with nearly 60% less delivered current (14 +/- 1 vs. 33 +/- 7 A, p < 0.0001). Although the efficacy of the biphasic and monophasic waveforms was comparable in patients with an impedance < 70 ohms (100% [biphasic] vs. 95% [monophasic], p = NS), the biphasic waveform was significantly more effective in patients with an impedance > or = 70 ohms (99% [biphasic] vs. 86% [monophasic], p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates a superior efficacy of rectilinear biphasic shocks as compared with monophasic shocks for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation, particularly in patients with a high transthoracic impedance. More important, biphasic shocks defibrillated with nearly 60% less current. The combination of increased efficacy and decreased current requirements suggests that biphasic shocks as compared with monophasic shocks are advantageous for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation.

Biphasic truncated exponential waveform defibrillation

This paper presents data from studies that have compared the efficacies of biphasic truncated exponential (BTE) and monophasic damped sine (MDS) waveform defibrillation in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and in in-hospital defibrillation. When a shock is delivered, rhythms evolve rapidly in a variety of directions and take different courses, even over a short time. When defibrillation is defined as termination of ventricular fibrillation at 5 seconds postshock, whether to an organized rhythm or asystole, low-energy BTE shocks appear to be more effective than high-energy MDS shocks in out-of-hospital arrest. For future research, the terms associated with defibrillation should be standardized and used uniformly by all investi-gators. In particular, there should be an agreed-upon definition of shock efficacy.

Evaluation of biphasic transthoracic defibrillation in an animal model of prolonged ventricular fibrillation

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether a biphasic defibrillation waveform (BDW) would produce a superior rate of converting prolonged ventricular fibrillation (VF) into a perfusing rhythm and delay the occurrence of asystole and/or pulseless electrical activity (PEA) during the resuscitation attempt, when compared with a monophasic defibrillation waveform (MDW).

METHODS

The authors performed a prospective, randomized, blinded experiment using an established swine model of prolonged VF. Thirty-four mixed-breed domestic swine (mean mass 22.9 kg) were sedated (ketamine/xylazine), anesthetized (isoflurane), and intubated. Aortic and femoral venous catheters were placed. ECG was monitored continuously. The animals were shocked into VF (3-s, 100-mA, 60-Hz shock), and were untreated for 8 minutes. Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) began with 1 minute of standardized (Thumper) chest compressions and ventilation. The animals were randomized to treatment with either BDW or MDW. Standard ACLS protocols were followed. The energy sequence was 2.5 J/kg first, 3.5 J/kg second, and 4.5 J/kg for all subsequent shocks. Outcome variables were time to event of asystole/PEA, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and one-hour survival. Data were analyzed with two-tailed Fisher's exact test and Kaplan-Meier survival plots (alpha = 0.05).

RESULTS

ROSC occurred more frequently in the BDW group (7/17) compared with the MDW group (1/17); p = 0.04. Survival analysis showed that the BDW significantly delayed the occurrence of asystole/PEA during the resuscitation attempt when compared with the MDW; log-ranked p = 0.02. One-hour survival rates (5/17 BDW and 1/17 MDW, p = 0.17) did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

BDW resulted in a superior rate of ROSC and delay in the occurrence of asystole/ PEA during the resuscitation attempt when compared with MDW.

The effects of biphasic and conventional monophasic defibrillation on postresuscitation myocardial function

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of biphasic defibrillation waveforms and conventional monophasic defibrillation waveforms on the success of initial defibrillation, postresuscitation myocardial function and duration of survival after prolonged ventricular fibrillation (VF).

BACKGROUND

We have recently demonstrated that the severity of postresuscitation myocardial dysfunction was closely related to the magnitude of the electrical energy of the delivered defibrillation shock. In the present study, the effects of fixed 150-J low-energy biphasic waveform shocks were compared with conventional monophasic waveform shocks after prolonged VF.

METHODS

Twenty anesthetized, mechanically ventilated domestic pigs were investigated. VF was induced with an AC current delivered to the right ventricular endocardium. After either 4 or 7 min of untreated ventricular fibrillation (VF), the animals were randomized for attempted defibrillation with up to three 150-J biphasic waveform shocks or conventional sequence of 200-, 300- or 360-J monophasic waveform shocks. If VF was not reversed, a 1-min interval of precordial compression preceded a second sequence of up to three shocks. The protocol was repeated until spontaneous circulation was restored or for a total of 15 min.

RESULTS

Monophasic waveform defibrillation after 4 or 7 min of untreated VF resuscitated eight of 10 pigs. All 10 pigs treated with biphasic waveform defibrillation were successfully resuscitated. Transesophageal echo-Doppler, arterial pressure and heart rate measurements demonstrated significantly less impairment of cardiovascular function after biphasic defibrillation.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower-energy biphasic waveform shocks were as effective as conventional higher energy monophasic waveform shocks for restoration of spontaneous circulation after 4 and 7 min of untreated VF. Significantly better postresuscitation myocardial function was observed after biphasic waveform defibrillation.

The influence of ventricular fibrillation duration on defibrillation efficacy using biphasic waveforms in humans

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to prospectively investigate the influence of ventricular fibrillation (VF) durations of 5, 10 and 20 s on the defibrillation threshold (DFT) during implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation.

BACKGROUND

Although the DFT using monophasic waveforms has been shown to increase with VF duration in humans, the effect of VF duration on defibrillation efficacy using biphasic waveforms in humans is not known.

METHODS

Thirty patients undergoing primary ICD implantation or pulse generator replacement were randomly assigned to have the DFT determined using biphasic shocks at two durations of VF each (5 and 10 s, 10 and 20 s or 5 and 20 s).

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in the mean DFT comparing VF durations of 5 s (9.5+/-6.0 J) and 10 s (10.8+/-7.0 J) (p=0.4). The mean DFT significantly increased from 10.9+/-6.1 J at 10 s of VF to 12.6+/-5.6 J (p=0.03) at 20 s of VF, and from 7.0+/-3.5 J at 5 s of VF to 10.5+/-6.3 J (p=0.04) at 20 s of VF. An increase in the DFT was observed in 14 patients as VF duration increased. There were no clinical characteristics that differentiated patients with and without an increase in the DFT.

CONCLUSIONS

Defibrillation efficacy decreases with increasing VF duration using biphasic waveforms in humans. Ventricular fibrillation durations greater than 10 s may negatively affect the effectiveness of ICD therapy.