Cargando…

Simultaneous Comparison of Many Triphasic Defibrillation Waveforms

Biphasic defibrillation waveforms are now accepted as being more effective at terminating ventricular fibrillation (VF) than monophasic waveforms. If two phases are better than one, this naturally leads to the hypothesis that additional phases improve efficacy. This study tests the hypothesis by add...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davis, Ron, Malkin, Robert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bentham Open 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3282884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22371814
http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874120701206010001
_version_ 1782224138127015936
author Davis, Ron
Malkin, Robert
author_facet Davis, Ron
Malkin, Robert
author_sort Davis, Ron
collection PubMed
description Biphasic defibrillation waveforms are now accepted as being more effective at terminating ventricular fibrillation (VF) than monophasic waveforms. If two phases are better than one, this naturally leads to the hypothesis that additional phases improve efficacy. This study tests the hypothesis by adding one additional phase. We examined the efficacy of 18 different triphasic waveforms simultaneously. We tested the rate of recovery, i.e., successful defibrillation, of 21 guinea pigs (820-1,050 g) using triphasic, monophasic and biphasic defibrillation waveforms. The biphasic and monophasic were control waveforms. VF was electrically induced twenty times per animal and a single defibrillation attempt was made using a test waveform VF episode. Every waveform was adjusted to the energy required to defibrillate that animal 50% of the time, using a biphasic waveform as a control. The success rate of each triphasic waveform was pair-wise compared to the biphasic and monophasic control using the adjusted McNemar statistical test. Of the 18 triphasic waveforms tested, two were significantly poorer than the monophasic control (p<0.05). One was superior to the biphasic waveform (p<0.1), but not statistically so. We concluded that, while adding a phase to a monophasic waveform does improve efficacy, adding an additional phase to a biphasic waveform does not necessarily improve efficacy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3282884
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Bentham Open
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32828842012-02-27 Simultaneous Comparison of Many Triphasic Defibrillation Waveforms Davis, Ron Malkin, Robert Open Biomed Eng J Article Biphasic defibrillation waveforms are now accepted as being more effective at terminating ventricular fibrillation (VF) than monophasic waveforms. If two phases are better than one, this naturally leads to the hypothesis that additional phases improve efficacy. This study tests the hypothesis by adding one additional phase. We examined the efficacy of 18 different triphasic waveforms simultaneously. We tested the rate of recovery, i.e., successful defibrillation, of 21 guinea pigs (820-1,050 g) using triphasic, monophasic and biphasic defibrillation waveforms. The biphasic and monophasic were control waveforms. VF was electrically induced twenty times per animal and a single defibrillation attempt was made using a test waveform VF episode. Every waveform was adjusted to the energy required to defibrillate that animal 50% of the time, using a biphasic waveform as a control. The success rate of each triphasic waveform was pair-wise compared to the biphasic and monophasic control using the adjusted McNemar statistical test. Of the 18 triphasic waveforms tested, two were significantly poorer than the monophasic control (p<0.05). One was superior to the biphasic waveform (p<0.1), but not statistically so. We concluded that, while adding a phase to a monophasic waveform does improve efficacy, adding an additional phase to a biphasic waveform does not necessarily improve efficacy. Bentham Open 2012-02-14 /pmc/articles/PMC3282884/ /pubmed/22371814 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874120701206010001 Text en © Davis and Malkin; Licensee Bentham Open. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Article
Davis, Ron
Malkin, Robert
Simultaneous Comparison of Many Triphasic Defibrillation Waveforms
title Simultaneous Comparison of Many Triphasic Defibrillation Waveforms
title_full Simultaneous Comparison of Many Triphasic Defibrillation Waveforms
title_fullStr Simultaneous Comparison of Many Triphasic Defibrillation Waveforms
title_full_unstemmed Simultaneous Comparison of Many Triphasic Defibrillation Waveforms
title_short Simultaneous Comparison of Many Triphasic Defibrillation Waveforms
title_sort simultaneous comparison of many triphasic defibrillation waveforms
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3282884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22371814
http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874120701206010001
work_keys_str_mv AT davisron simultaneouscomparisonofmanytriphasicdefibrillationwaveforms
AT malkinrobert simultaneouscomparisonofmanytriphasicdefibrillationwaveforms