BACKGROUND: We previously showed that the cardioversion threshold (CVT) for ventricular tachycardia (VT) is phase dependent when a single monophasic shock (1MP) is used. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to extend these findings to a biphasic shock (1BP) and to compare the efficacy of phase-independent multiple monophasic (5MP) and biphasic shocks (5BP). METHODS: Panoramic optical mapping with blebbistatin (5 microM) was performed in postmyocardial infarction rabbit hearts (n = 8). Flecainide (1.64 +/- 0.68 microM) was administered to promote sustained arrhythmias. 5MP and 5BP were applied within one VT cycle length (CL). Results were compared to 1BP and antitachycardia pacing. RESULTS: We observed monomorphic VT with CL = 149.6 +/- 18.0 ms. Similar to 1MP, CVTs of 1BP were found to be phase dependent, and the maximum versus minimum CVT was 8.6 +/- 1.7 V/cm versus 3.7 +/- 1.9 V/cm, respectively (P = .0013). Efficacy of 5MP was higher than that of 1BP and 5BP. CVT was 3.2 +/- 1.4 V/cm for 5MP versus 5.3 +/- 1.9 V/cm for 5BP (P = .00027). 5MP versus averaged 1BP CVT was 3.6 +/- 2.1 V/cm versus. 6.8 +/- 1.5 V/cm, respectively (P = .00024). Antitachycardia pacing was found to be completely ineffective in this model. CONCLUSION: Maintenance of shock-induced virtual electrode polarization by multiple monophasic shocks over a VT cycle is responsible for unpinning of reentry leading to self-termination. Elimination of virtual electrode polarization by shock polarity reversal during multiple biphasic shocks proved ineffective. A significant reduction in CVT can be achieved by applying multiple monophasic shocks within one VT CL or one single shock at the proper coupling interval.
BACKGROUND: We previously showed that the cardioversion threshold (CVT) for ventricular tachycardia (VT) is phase dependent when a single monophasic shock (1MP) is used. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to extend these findings to a biphasic shock (1BP) and to compare the efficacy of phase-independent multiple monophasic (5MP) and biphasic shocks (5BP). METHODS: Panoramic optical mapping with blebbistatin (5 microM) was performed in postmyocardial infarction rabbit hearts (n = 8). Flecainide (1.64 +/- 0.68 microM) was administered to promote sustained arrhythmias. 5MP and 5BP were applied within one VT cycle length (CL). Results were compared to 1BP and antitachycardia pacing. RESULTS: We observed monomorphic VT with CL = 149.6 +/- 18.0 ms. Similar to 1MP, CVTs of 1BP were found to be phase dependent, and the maximum versus minimum CVT was 8.6 +/- 1.7 V/cm versus 3.7 +/- 1.9 V/cm, respectively (P = .0013). Efficacy of 5MP was higher than that of 1BP and 5BP. CVT was 3.2 +/- 1.4 V/cm for 5MP versus 5.3 +/- 1.9 V/cm for 5BP (P = .00027). 5MP versus averaged 1BP CVT was 3.6 +/- 2.1 V/cm versus. 6.8 +/- 1.5 V/cm, respectively (P = .00024). Antitachycardia pacing was found to be completely ineffective in this model. CONCLUSION: Maintenance of shock-induced virtual electrode polarization by multiple monophasic shocks over a VT cycle is responsible for unpinning of reentry leading to self-termination. Elimination of virtual electrode polarization by shock polarity reversal during multiple biphasic shocks proved ineffective. A significant reduction in CVT can be achieved by applying multiple monophasic shocks within one VT CL or one single shock at the proper coupling interval.
Authors: R Peinado; J Almendral; T Rius; A Moya; J L Merino; J Martínez-Alday; J Pérez-Villacastín; A Arenal; J Ormaetxe; L Tercedor; O Medina; A Pastor; J Delcán Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1998-12-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: A J Moss; W J Hall; D S Cannom; J P Daubert; S L Higgins; H Klein; J H Levine; S Saksena; A L Waldo; D Wilber; M W Brown; M Heo Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-12-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: S J Connolly; M Gent; R S Roberts; P Dorian; D Roy; R S Sheldon; L B Mitchell; M S Green; G J Klein; B O'Brien Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-03-21 Impact factor: 29.690
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
Authors: Lizhi Xu; Sarah R Gutbrod; Yinji Ma; Artin Petrossians; Yuhao Liu; R Chad Webb; Jonathan A Fan; Zijian Yang; Renxiao Xu; John J Whalen; James D Weiland; Yonggang Huang; Igor R Efimov; John A Rogers Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: Wenwen Li; Ajit H Janardhan; Vadim V Fedorov; Qun Sha; Richard B Schuessler; Igor R Efimov Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2011-10-06
Authors: Shreyas Punacha; Sebastian Berg; Anupama Sebastian; Valentin I Krinski; Stefan Luther; T K Shajahan Journal: Proc Math Phys Eng Sci Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 2.704
Authors: Ajit H Janardhan; Wenwen Li; Vadim V Fedorov; Michael Yeung; Michael J Wallendorf; Richard B Schuessler; Igor R Efimov Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-11-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Ajit H Janardhan; Sarah R Gutbrod; Wenwen Li; Di Lang; Richard B Schuessler; Igor R Efimov Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 24.094