OBJECTIVE: The evidence that monophasic defibrillation success is mainly determined by current is secure. However, modern defibrillators use biphasic waveforms. The aim of this study was to compare energy, peak voltage and peak current in predicting biphasic shock success in a porcine model of ventricular fibrillation (VF) where the impedance varies within a wide of ranges. METHODS: In 14 domestic male pigs weighing between 27 and 38 kg, VF was electrically induced and untreated for 15 s. Animals were randomized to receive defibrillation attempts from one of two defibrillators with different impedance compensation methods. A grouped up-and-down defibrillation threshold testing protocol was used to maintain the average success rate in the neighborhood of 50%. After a recovery interval of 5 min, the testing sequence was repeated for a total of 60 test shocks for each animal. RESULTS: A high defibrillation success was observed when high peak current was delivered. The area under ROC curve for predicting shock success was 0.681 for peak current, 0.585 for peak voltage and 0.562 for energy. The odds ratio revealed that peak current was a better predictor (OR=1.321, p<0.001) for defibrillation outcome compared with energy (OR=0.979, p<0.001) and peak voltage (OR=1.000, p=0.69) when multivariable logistic regression was conducted. CONCLUSION: In this porcine model of VF within a wide range of transthoracic impedance, peak current was a better indicator for shock success than the currently used energy for biphasic defibrillatory shocks. This finding may encourage design of new current-based biphasic defibrillators.

Current Is Better Than Energy as Predictor of Success for Biphasic Defibrillatory Shocks in A Porcine Model of Ventricular Fibrillation / G. Ristagno, T. Yu, W. Quan, G. Freeman, Y. Li. - In: RESUSCITATION. - ISSN 0300-9572. - 84:5(2013 May), pp. 678-683. [10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.09.029]

Current Is Better Than Energy as Predictor of Success for Biphasic Defibrillatory Shocks in A Porcine Model of Ventricular Fibrillation

G. Ristagno;
2013-05

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The evidence that monophasic defibrillation success is mainly determined by current is secure. However, modern defibrillators use biphasic waveforms. The aim of this study was to compare energy, peak voltage and peak current in predicting biphasic shock success in a porcine model of ventricular fibrillation (VF) where the impedance varies within a wide of ranges. METHODS: In 14 domestic male pigs weighing between 27 and 38 kg, VF was electrically induced and untreated for 15 s. Animals were randomized to receive defibrillation attempts from one of two defibrillators with different impedance compensation methods. A grouped up-and-down defibrillation threshold testing protocol was used to maintain the average success rate in the neighborhood of 50%. After a recovery interval of 5 min, the testing sequence was repeated for a total of 60 test shocks for each animal. RESULTS: A high defibrillation success was observed when high peak current was delivered. The area under ROC curve for predicting shock success was 0.681 for peak current, 0.585 for peak voltage and 0.562 for energy. The odds ratio revealed that peak current was a better predictor (OR=1.321, p<0.001) for defibrillation outcome compared with energy (OR=0.979, p<0.001) and peak voltage (OR=1.000, p=0.69) when multivariable logistic regression was conducted. CONCLUSION: In this porcine model of VF within a wide range of transthoracic impedance, peak current was a better indicator for shock success than the currently used energy for biphasic defibrillatory shocks. This finding may encourage design of new current-based biphasic defibrillators.
Cardiac arrest; Ventricular fibrillation; Impedance compensation; Current based defibrillation; Energy based defibrillation; Shock success
Settore MED/41 - Anestesiologia
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
current.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 649.08 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
649.08 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
1-s2.0-S0300957212008180-main.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 651.31 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
651.31 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2434/620423
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 12
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 13
social impact