Literature DB >> 1555291

Cardiac potential and potential gradient fields generated by single, combined, and sequential shocks during ventricular defibrillation.

J M Wharton1, P D Wolf, W M Smith, P S Chen, D W Frazier, S Yabe, N Danieley, R E Ideker.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Potential gradient field determination may be a helpful means of describing the effects of defibrillation shocks; however, potential gradient field requirements for defibrillation with different electrode configurations have not been established. METHODS AND
RESULTS: To evaluate the field requirements for defibrillation, potential fields during defibrillation shocks and the following ventricular activations were recorded with 74 epicardial electrodes in 12 open-chest dogs with the use of a computerized mapping system. Shock electrodes (2.64 cm2) were attached to the lateral right atrium (R), lateral left ventricular base (L), and left ventricular apex (V). Four electrode configurations were tested: single shocks of 14-msec duration given to two single anode-single cathode configurations, R:V and L:V, and to one dual anode-single cathode configuration, (R+L):V; and sequential 7-msec shocks separated by 1 msec given to R:V and L:V (R:V----L:V). Defibrillation threshold (DFT) current was significantly lower for R:V----L:V than for the other configurations and markedly higher for L:V. Despite these differences, the minimum potential gradients measured at DFT were not significantly different (approximately 6-7 V/cm for each electrode configuration). Potential gradient fields generated by the electrode configurations were markedly uneven, with a 15-27-fold change from lowest to highest gradient, with the greatest decrease in gradient occurring near the shock electrodes. Although gradient fields varied with the electrode configuration, all configurations produced weak fields along the right ventricular base. Early sites of epicardial activation after all unsuccessful shocks occurred in areas in which the field was weak; 87% occurred at sites with gradients less than 15 V/cm. Ventricular tachycardia originating in high gradient areas near shock electrodes followed 11 of 67 successful shocks.
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that 1) defibrillation fields created by small epicardial electrodes are very uneven; 2) achievement of a certain minimum potential gradient over both ventricles is necessary for ventricular defibrillation; 3) the difference in shock strengths required to achieve this minimum gradient over both ventricles may explain the differences in DFTs for various electrode configurations; and 4) high gradient areas in the uneven fields can induce ectopic activation after successful shocks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1555291     DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.85.4.1510

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  14 in total

1.  Atria are more susceptible to electroporation than ventricles: implications for atrial stunning, shock-induced arrhythmia and defibrillation failure.

Authors:  Vadim V Fedorov; Geran Kostecki; Matt Hemphill; Igor R Efimov
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2008-01-29       Impact factor: 6.343

2.  Spatial potential and current distributions along transvenous defibrillation electrodes: variation of electrode characteristics.

Authors:  R Pendekanti; C S Henriquez
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  1996 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.934

3.  A generalized activating function for predicting virtual electrodes in cardiac tissue.

Authors:  E A Sobie; R C Susil; L Tung
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.033

4.  Is defibrillation testing of ICDs necessary?

Authors:  J Lacy Sturdivant; Michael R Gold
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2012-10-02       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  Substernal lead implantation: a novel option to manage DFT failure in S-ICD patients.

Authors:  M Guenther; S Kolschmann; M Knaut
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2014-10-02       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  Effects of electrode interface impedance on finite element models of transvenous defibrillation.

Authors:  P H Schimpf; G Johnson; D B Jorgenson; D R Haynor; G H Bardy; Y Kim
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 2.602

7.  Transmural recording of shock potential gradient fields, early postshock activations, and refibrillation episodes associated with external defibrillation of long-duration ventricular fibrillation in swine.

Authors:  James D Allred; Cheryl R Killingsworth; J Scott Allison; Derek J Dosdall; Sharon B Melnick; William M Smith; Raymond E Ideker; Gregory P Walcott
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2008-08-28       Impact factor: 6.343

8.  [Mechanisms of electrical defibrillation].

Authors:  S Reek; R E Ideker
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  1997-03

9.  Modeling the role of the coronary vasculature during external field stimulation.

Authors:  Martin J Bishop; Patrick M Boyle; Gernot Plank; Donald G Welsh; Edward J Vigmond
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 4.538

10.  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
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.