Literature DB >> 16378672

Post-shock myocardial stunning: a prospective randomised double-blind comparison of monophasic and biphasic waveforms.

Charles D Deakin1, Jonathan J S Ambler.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Compared with monophasic defibrillation, biphasic defibrillation is associated with less myocardial stunning and earlier activation of sodium channels. We therefore hypothesised that earlier sodium channel activation would result in earlier restoration of the first sinus beat following elective DC cardioversion.
METHODS: Adults undergoing elective DC cardioversion were randomised to receive either monophasic or biphasic escalating transthoracic shocks. The ECG was recorded electronically during defibrillation and the time from delivery of the shock to restoration of the first sinus beat, measured from the beginning of the 'P' wave, was calculated.
RESULTS: Seventy four patients were studied. Data were unavailable from 18 patients. There was no demographic difference between groups. Median time to the first sinus beat following monophasic defibrillation (n=25) was 3.66 s (95% CI 2.55-4.61 s) and following biphasic defibrillation (n=33) was 2.21s (95% CI 1.76-2.56 s; P<or=0.0001). Linear regression confirmed that the waveform was an independent predictor of time to restoration of sinus rhythm; P<0.0001. The final defibrillation energy level used to achieve cardioversion was not an independent predictor of time to restoration of sinus rhythm; P=0.49.
CONCLUSION: Biphasic defibrillation for elective DC cardioversion achieved more rapid restoration of the first sinus beat compared with a monophasic waveform. Waveform, but not energy level that achieved defibrillation, was an independent predictor of time to restoration of the first sinus beat. The mechanism for this may be related to the earlier reactivation of sodium channels associated with the biphasic waveform.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16378672     DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2005.07.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Resuscitation        ISSN: 0300-9572            Impact factor:   5.262


  5 in total

Review 1.  Direct oral anti-coagulants compared to vitamin-K antagonists in cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis.

Authors:  Natale Daniele Brunetti; Nicola Tarantino; Luisa De Gennaro; Michele Correale; Francesco Santoro; Matteo Di Biase
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  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

Review 3.  Using Nanosecond Shocks for Cardiac Defibrillation.

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

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

Review 5.  [Adult advanced life support].

Authors:  Jasmeet Soar; Bernd W Böttiger; Pierre Carli; Keith Couper; Charles D Deakin; Therese Djärv; Carsten Lott; Theresa Olasveengen; Peter Paal; Tommaso Pellis; Gavin D Perkins; Claudio Sandroni; Jerry P Nolan
Journal:  Notf Rett Med       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 0.826

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.