Literature DB >> 17114971

Definition of successful defibrillation.

Rudolph W Koster1, Robert G Walker, Anouk P van Alem.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The definition of defibrillation shock "success" endorsed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation since the publication of Guidelines 2000 for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiac Care has been removal of ventricular fibrillation at 5 secs after shock delivery. Although this success criterion provides a direct assessment of the primary task of a shock, it may not be the only clinically useful measure of shock outcome. We evaluated a different defibrillation success criterion to determine whether it could provide additional insight into the relative performance of different defibrillation shocks.
DESIGN: A randomized study comparing monophasic and biphasic waveform shocks is reported with return of organized rhythm as the primary outcome measure of defibrillation success. PATIENTS: A total of 120 patients with out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation as the first recorded rhythm were treated with defibrillation with automated external defibrillators.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Return of organized rhythm (two QRS complexes, <5 secs apart, <60 secs after defibrillation) was achieved in 31 monophasic shock (45%) and 35 biphasic shock (69%) patients (relative risk, 1.53, 95% confidence interval, 1.11-2.10). Logistic regression analysis revealed that shock waveform was the strongest independent predictor of return of organized rhythm (odds ratio, 4.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.67-10.0). Defibrillation success with the conventional International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation criterion was very high (91% and 98%, respectively) and not significantly different between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Return of organized rhythm proved to be a more sensitive measure of relative defibrillation shock performance than the conventional shock success criterion. Inclusion of return of organized rhythm as an end point in future clinical research could help discern more subtle defibrillation shock effects and contribute to further optimization of defibrillation technology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17114971     DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000246008.95156.78

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  6 in total

1.  Value of capnography to predict defibrillation success in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Beatriz Chicote; Elisabete Aramendi; Unai Irusta; Pamela Owens; Mohamud Daya; Ahamed Idris
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2019-03-02       Impact factor: 5.262

Review 2.  Ventricular tachyarrhythmias (out-of-hospital cardiac arrests).

Authors:  Eddy S Lang; Kim Browning
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2010-12-21

3.  Prompt prediction of successful defibrillation from 1-s ventricular fibrillation waveform in patients with out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Hiroshi Endoh; Seiji Hida; Satomi Oohashi; Yusuke Hayashi; Hidenori Kinoshita; Tadayuki Honda
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2010-11-27       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 4.  Effectiveness of alternative shock strategies for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review.

Authors:  Helen Pocock; Charles D Deakin; Ranjit Lall; Christopher M Smith; Gavin D Perkins
Journal:  Resusc Plus       Date:  2022-05-11

Review 5.  Biphasic versus monophasic waveforms for transthoracic defibrillation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Steven C Faddy; Paul A Jennings
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-02-10

6.  Predict Defibrillation Outcome Using Stepping Increment of Poincare Plot for Out-of-Hospital Ventricular Fibrillation Cardiac Arrest.

Authors:  Yushun Gong; Yubao Lu; Lei Zhang; Hehua Zhang; Yongqin Li
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 3.411

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.