Literature DB >> 17541815

Optimizing defibrillation waveforms for ICDs.

Mark W Kroll1, Charles D Swerdlow.   

Abstract

While no simple electrical descriptor provides a good measure of defibrillation efficacy, the waveform parameters that most directly influence defibrillation are voltage and duration. Voltage is a critical parameter for defibrillation because its spatial derivative defines the electrical field that interacts with the heart. Similarly, waveform duration is a critical parameter because the shock interacts with the heart for the duration of the waveform. Shock energy is the most often cited metric of shock strength and an ICD's capacity to defibrillate, but it is not a direct measure of shock effectiveness. Despite the physiological complexities of defibrillation, a simple approach in which the heart is modeled as passive resistor-capacitor (RC) network has proved useful for predicting efficient defibrillation waveforms. The model makes two assumptions: (1) The goal of both a monophasic shock and the first phase of a biphasic shock is to maximize the voltage change in the membrane at the end of the shock for a given stored energy. (2) The goal of the second phase of a biphasic shock is to discharge the membrane back to the zero potential, removing the charge deposited by the first phase. This model predicts that the optimal waveform rises in an exponential upward curve, but such an ascending waveform is difficult to generate efficiently. ICDs use electronically efficient capacitive-discharge waveforms, which require truncation for effective defibrillation. Even with optimal truncation, capacitive-discharge waveforms require more voltage and energy to achieve the same membrane voltage than do square waves and ascending waveforms. In ICDs, the value of the shock output capacitance is a key intermediary in establishing the relationship between stored energy-the key determinant of ICD size-and waveform voltage as a function of time, the key determinant of defibrillation efficacy. The RC model predicts that, for capacitive-discharge waveforms, stored energy is minimized when the ICD's system time constant taus equals the cell membrane time constant taum, where taus is the product of the output capacitance and the resistance of the defibrillation pathway. Since the goal of phase two is to reverse the membrane charging effect of phase one, there is no advantage to additional waveform phases. The voltages and capacitances used in commercial ICDs vary widely, resulting in substantial disparities in waveform parameters. The development of present biphasic waveforms in the 1990s resulted in marked improvements in defibrillation efficacy. It is unlikely that substantial improvement in defibrillation efficacy will be achieved without radical changes in waveform design.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17541815     DOI: 10.1007/s10840-007-9095-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1383-875X            Impact factor:   1.900


  83 in total

1.  Smaller capacitors improve the biphasic waveform.

Authors:  K Rist; P J Tchou; K Mowrey; M W Kroll; J E Brewer
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  1994-09

2.  Comparative reproducibility of defibrillation threshold and upper limit of vulnerability.

Authors:  C D Swerdlow; S Davie; T Ahern; P S Chen
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 1.976

3.  The mechanisms of the vulnerable window: the role of virtual electrodes and shock polarity.

Authors:  Y Yamanouchi; Y Cheng; P J Tchou; I R Efimov
Journal:  Can J Physiol Pharmacol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 2.273

4.  Ventricular defibrillation using biphasic waveforms: the importance of phasic duration.

Authors:  A S Tang; S Yabe; J M Wharton; M Dolker; W M Smith; R E Ideker
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  Choosing the optimal monophasic and biphasic waveforms for ventricular defibrillation.

Authors:  G P Walcott; R G Walker; A W Cates; W Krassowska; W M Smith; R E Ideker
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  1995-09

6.  Sudden death in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: the importance of post-shock electromechanical dissociation.

Authors:  L Brent Mitchell; Edgar A Pineda; Jack L Titus; Paulette M Bartosch; David G Benditt
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2002-04-17       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Efficacy and safety of defibrillation with rectangular waves of 2- to 20-milliseconds duration.

Authors:  M J Niebauer; C F Babbs; L A Geddes; J D Bourland
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Experimental evidence of improved transthoracic defibrillation with electroporation-enhancing pulses.

Authors:  Robert A Malkin; Dongxu Guan; John P Wikswo
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 4.538

9.  ON THE INTENSITY-TIME RELATIONS FOR STIMULATION BY ELECTRIC CURRENTS. II.

Authors:  H A Blair
Journal:  J Gen Physiol       Date:  1932-07-20       Impact factor: 4.086

10.  ON THE INTENSITY-TIME RELATIONS FOR STIMULATION BY ELECTRIC CURRENTS. I.

Authors:  H A Blair
Journal:  J Gen Physiol       Date:  1932-07-20       Impact factor: 4.086

View more
  9 in total

1.  Reversible cardiac conduction block and defibrillation with high-frequency electric field.

Authors:  Harikrishna Tandri; Seth H Weinberg; Kelly C Chang; Renjun Zhu; Natalia A Trayanova; Leslie Tung; Ronald D Berger
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2011-09-28       Impact factor: 17.956

2.  Induction by direct current pulse versus 50-Hz pacing on ventricular fibrillation and defibrillation.

Authors:  Hoong Sern Lim; Sharon Flannigan; Howard Marshall
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 1.900

3.  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

4.  Conceptual Intra-Cardiac Electrode Configurations That Facilitate Directional Cardiac Stimulation for Optimal Electrotherapy.

Authors:  Adam Connolly; Steven Williams; Kawal Rhode; Christopher A Rinaldi; Martin J Bishop
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.538

5.  Improvements in 25 Years of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy.

Authors:  G H van Welsenes; C J W Borleffs; J B van Rees; J Z Atary; J Thijssen; E E van der Wall; M J Schalij
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2010-12-22       Impact factor: 2.380

6.  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

7.  Toward a More Efficient Implementation of Antifibrillation Pacing.

Authors:  Dan Wilson; Jeff Moehlis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-08       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Highly trabeculated structure of the human endocardium underlies asymmetrical response to low-energy monophasic shocks.

Authors:  Adam Connolly; Matthew D Robson; Jürgen Schneider; Rebecca Burton; Gernot Plank; Martin J Bishop
Journal:  Chaos       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.642

9.  Generation of a cohort of whole-torso cardiac models for assessing the utility of a novel computed shock vector efficiency metric for ICD optimisation.

Authors:  Anne-Marie Plancke; Adam Connolly; Philip M Gemmell; Aurel Neic; Luke C McSpadden; John Whitaker; Mark O'Neill; Christopher A Rinaldi; Ronak Rajani; Steven A Niederer; Gernot Plank; Martin J Bishop
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 4.589

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.