Literature DB >> 11846315

Kinetics of defibrillation shock-induced response: design implications for the optimal defibrillation waveform.

K A Mowrey1, Y Cheng, P J Tchou, R Efimov.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is a well-established therapy for treating patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death. Recently formulated virtual electrode polarization theory is a promising foundation for the theory of defibrillation. Yet, continuing optimization of defibrillation therapy is limited to primarily empirical methods due to difficulties in assessing kinetics of cellular response in whole heart models of defibrillation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the response of the myocardium in the context of virtual electrode polarization. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We used a Langendorff-perfused rabbit heart model of ICD therapy and voltage-sensitive fluorescent dye imaging in order to map kinetics of trans membrane potential during both mono- and biphasic shocks applied at various phases of the QT-interval. Cellular response was fitted to a single exponential function using the Levenberg-Marquardt method. Time constants (tau) were measured in 45 288 optical records from 17 hearts. We found that cellular response depends upon both QT-phase of application, intensity, polarity, and phase of the biphasic waveform. Shocks of larger strengths produce a faster response. The tau of the first-phase negatively polarizing response was significantly larger compared with the positively polarizing response at intensities below 200 V, but smaller at 200 V and above. The tau of the second phase negatively polarizing response was always slower than the positively polarizing response, regardless of amplitude, and timing. Overall, tau ranged from 1.6 ms to 14.2 ms.
CONCLUSIONS: The time constant of the membrane depends on the field, action potential phase and the shock polarity, but exceeds 1 msec. Therefore, we suggest using a slower shock leading edge, since the membrane cannot follow potentially damaging faster waveforms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11846315     DOI: 10.1053/eupc.2001.0199

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Europace        ISSN: 1099-5129            Impact factor:   5.214


  6 in total

Review 1.  Using Nanosecond Shocks for Cardiac Defibrillation.

Authors:  Johanna U Neuber; Frency Varghese; Andrei G Pakhomov; Christian W Zemlin
Journal:  Bioelectricity       Date:  2019-12-12

2.  Membrane time constant during internal defibrillation strength shocks in intact heart: effects of Na+ and Ca2+ channel blockers.

Authors:  Kent A Mowrey; Igor R Efimov; Yuanna Cheng
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2008-09-03

Review 3.  Optimizing defibrillation waveforms for ICDs.

Authors:  Mark W Kroll; Charles D Swerdlow
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2007-06-01       Impact factor: 1.900

4.  Low-energy defibrillation with nanosecond electric shocks.

Authors:  Frency Varghese; Johanna U Neuber; Fei Xie; Jonathan M Philpott; Andrei G Pakhomov; Christian W Zemlin
Journal:  Cardiovasc Res       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 10.787

5.  Extended charge banking model of dual path shocks for implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

Authors:  Derek J Dosdall; James D Sweeney
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 2.819

6.  High defibrillation threshold: the science, signs and solutions.

Authors:  Sony Jacob; Victorio Pidlaoan; Jaspreet Singh; Aditya Bharadwaj; Mehul B Patel; Antonio Carrillo
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2010-01-07
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.