Advanced search
Add to list

Transthoracic defibrillation of short lasting ventricular fibrillation : a randomised trial for comparison of the efficacy of low energy biphasic rectilinear and monophasic damped sine shocks

(2002) ACTA CARDIOLOGICA. 57(5). p.329-334
Author
Organization
Abstract
Background - Biphasic rectilinear shocks are more effective than monophasic shocks for transthoracic atrial defibrillation and for ventricular arrhythmias during electrophysiological testing. We undertook the present study to compare the efficacy of 100 J rectilinear biphasic waveform shocks with 150 J monophasic damped sine waveform shocks for transthoracic defibrillation of true ventricular fibrillation during defibrillation threshold testing (DFT). The second aim of the study was to analyse the influence of patch positions on the efficacy of defibrillation. Methods - 50 episodes of 14 patients (age ranging from 37 to 82 years) who underwent DFT testing were randomised for back-up shocks with either a sequence of 100 and 200 J biphasic waveform, or a sequence of 150 and 360 J conventional monophasic shocks. A binary search protocol was used at implantation and before hospital discharge. Patients were also randomised to an anteroposterior position versus a right-anterior-apical position. A crossover was performed between implantation and pre-hospital discharge for biphasic versus monophasic sequence as well as for the 2 different positions. Results - After failed internal shocks, 27 episodes were treated with biphasic, and 23 with monophasic shocks. The first attempt by the external device did not terminate 11 episodes (2 biphasic, 9 monophasic). The first shock efficacy was significantly greater with biphasic than with monophasic shocks (p < 0.02). The overall success rate was 93% with biphasic shocks and 64% with monophasic shocks. In multivariate regression analysis including patch position, arrhythmia duration, type of waveform, testing order and session, only waveform was associated with successful defibrillation (p < 0.02). Conclusion - For transthoracic defibrillation of ventricular fibrillation, low-energy rectilinear biphasic shocks are more effective than monophasic shocks.The position of the defibrillation shock pads has no influence on the biphasic shock efficacy, but anteroposterior pad position is more effective using monophasic shocks.
Keywords
defibrillation, biphasic shocks, DFT testing, POSTRESUSCITATION MYOCARDIAL DYSFUNCTION, WAVE-FORMS, EXTERNAL DEFIBRILLATION, CARDIOVERSION, RESUSCITATION, MULTICENTER, ELECTRODES, WAVEFORMS, STRENGTH, DURATION

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Szili-Torok, Tamas et al. “Transthoracic Defibrillation of Short Lasting Ventricular Fibrillation : a Randomised Trial for Comparison of the Efficacy of Low Energy Biphasic Rectilinear and Monophasic Damped Sine Shocks.” ACTA CARDIOLOGICA 57.5 (2002): 329–334. Print.
APA
Szili-Torok, Tamas, Theuns, D., Verblaauw, T., Scholten, M., Kimman, G.-J., Res, J., & Jordaens, L. (2002). Transthoracic defibrillation of short lasting ventricular fibrillation : a randomised trial for comparison of the efficacy of low energy biphasic rectilinear and monophasic damped sine shocks. ACTA CARDIOLOGICA, 57(5), 329–334.
Chicago author-date
Szili-Torok, Tamas, Dominic Theuns, Ton Verblaauw, Marcoen Scholten, Geert-Jan Kimman, Jan Res, and Luc Jordaens. 2002. “Transthoracic Defibrillation of Short Lasting Ventricular Fibrillation : a Randomised Trial for Comparison of the Efficacy of Low Energy Biphasic Rectilinear and Monophasic Damped Sine Shocks.” Acta Cardiologica 57 (5): 329–334.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Szili-Torok, Tamas, Dominic Theuns, Ton Verblaauw, Marcoen Scholten, Geert-Jan Kimman, Jan Res, and Luc Jordaens. 2002. “Transthoracic Defibrillation of Short Lasting Ventricular Fibrillation : a Randomised Trial for Comparison of the Efficacy of Low Energy Biphasic Rectilinear and Monophasic Damped Sine Shocks.” Acta Cardiologica 57 (5): 329–334.
Vancouver
1.
Szili-Torok T, Theuns D, Verblaauw T, Scholten M, Kimman G-J, Res J, et al. Transthoracic defibrillation of short lasting ventricular fibrillation : a randomised trial for comparison of the efficacy of low energy biphasic rectilinear and monophasic damped sine shocks. ACTA CARDIOLOGICA. 2002;57(5):329–34.
IEEE
[1]
T. Szili-Torok et al., “Transthoracic defibrillation of short lasting ventricular fibrillation : a randomised trial for comparison of the efficacy of low energy biphasic rectilinear and monophasic damped sine shocks,” ACTA CARDIOLOGICA, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 329–334, 2002.
@article{8520549,
  abstract     = {Background - Biphasic rectilinear shocks are more effective than monophasic shocks for transthoracic atrial defibrillation and for ventricular arrhythmias during electrophysiological testing. We undertook the present study to compare the efficacy of 100 J rectilinear biphasic waveform shocks with 150 J monophasic damped sine waveform shocks for transthoracic defibrillation of true ventricular fibrillation during defibrillation threshold testing (DFT). The second aim of the study was to analyse the influence of patch positions on the efficacy of defibrillation. 
Methods - 50 episodes of 14 patients (age ranging from 37 to 82 years) who underwent DFT testing were randomised for back-up shocks with either a sequence of 100 and 200 J biphasic waveform, or a sequence of 150 and 360 J conventional monophasic shocks. A binary search protocol was used at implantation and before hospital discharge. Patients were also randomised to an anteroposterior position versus a right-anterior-apical position. A crossover was performed between implantation and pre-hospital discharge for biphasic versus monophasic sequence as well as for the 2 different positions. 
Results - After failed internal shocks, 27 episodes were treated with biphasic, and 23 with monophasic shocks. The first attempt by the external device did not terminate 11 episodes (2 biphasic, 9 monophasic). The first shock efficacy was significantly greater with biphasic than with monophasic shocks (p < 0.02). The overall success rate was 93% with biphasic shocks and 64% with monophasic shocks. In multivariate regression analysis including patch position, arrhythmia duration, type of waveform, testing order and session, only waveform was associated with successful defibrillation (p < 0.02). 
Conclusion - For transthoracic defibrillation of ventricular fibrillation, low-energy rectilinear biphasic shocks are more effective than monophasic shocks.The position of the defibrillation shock pads has no influence on the biphasic shock efficacy, but anteroposterior pad position is more effective using monophasic shocks.},
  author       = {Szili-Torok, Tamas and Theuns, Dominic and Verblaauw, Ton and Scholten, Marcoen and Kimman, Geert-Jan and Res, Jan and Jordaens, Luc},
  issn         = {0001-5385},
  journal      = {ACTA CARDIOLOGICA},
  keywords     = {defibrillation,biphasic shocks,DFT testing,POSTRESUSCITATION MYOCARDIAL DYSFUNCTION,WAVE-FORMS,EXTERNAL DEFIBRILLATION,CARDIOVERSION,RESUSCITATION,MULTICENTER,ELECTRODES,WAVEFORMS,STRENGTH,DURATION},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {5},
  pages        = {329--334},
  title        = {Transthoracic defibrillation of short lasting ventricular fibrillation : a randomised trial for comparison of the efficacy of low energy biphasic rectilinear and monophasic damped sine shocks},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/ac.57.5.2005448},
  volume       = {57},
  year         = {2002},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: