Suppr超能文献

急性缺血继发自发性心室颤动的双相波体外除颤阈值

Biphasic waveform external defibrillation thresholds for spontaneous ventricular fibrillation secondary to acute ischemia.

作者信息

Walcott Gregory P, Killingsworth Cheryl R, Smith William M, Ideker Raymond E

机构信息

Cardiac Rhythm Management Laboratory, Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-0019, USA.

出版信息

J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002 Jan 16;39(2):359-65. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01723-5.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to determine if the defibrillation threshold (DFT) after spontaneous ventricular fibrillation (VF) secondary to acute ischemia differs from the DFT for electrically induced VF in the absence of ischemia in anesthetized, closed-chest dogs and pigs.

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of external defibrillators has been tested mainly in animals and humans using E-VF, yet external defibrillators are often used in patients to halt S-VF.

METHODS

Protocol 1: biphasic truncated exponential (BTE) waveform shocks were delivered through electrodes placed in an anterior-anterior (A-A) position (left and right lateral thorax) in nine dogs. After measuring the E-VF DFT, acute ischemia was induced with an angioplasty balloon in either the left anterior descending or left circumflex coronary artery, and the S-VF DFT was determined. Protocol 2: in a group of 12 pigs, the E-VF DFT and S-VF DFT were determined for electrodes in the A-A position and in the anterior-posterior position (A-P). Protocol 3: the E-VF DFT was determined in seven pigs. Then up to three shocks 1.5x the E-VF DFT were delivered to S-VF. If defibrillation did not occur, a step-up protocol was used until defibrillation occurred.

RESULTS

Protocol 1: the DFT for E-VF was 65 +/- 28 J (mean +/- SD) compared with 226 +/- 97 J for S-VF, p < 0.05. Protocol 2: the DFT was 152 +/- 58 J for E-VF and 315 +/- 123 J for S-VF for A-A electrodes. The DFT was 100 +/- 43 J for E-VF and 206 +/- 114 J for S-VF for A-P electrodes. Protocol 3: 11/37 shocks of strength 1.5x E-VF DFT (182 +/- 40 J) stopped the arrhythmia. The episodes of S-VF not halted by these shocks required energy levels of up to 400 J for defibrillation.

CONCLUSIONS

External defibrillation of S-VF induced by acute ischemia requires significantly more energy than VF induced by 60-Hz current in the absence of ischemia. A safety margin >1.5x the DFT for electrically induced VF may be necessary in BTE external defibrillators to defibrillate S-VF.

摘要

目的

本研究的目的是确定在麻醉的闭胸犬和猪中,急性缺血继发的自发性室颤(VF)后的除颤阈值(DFT)是否与无缺血情况下电诱导VF的DFT不同。

背景

体外除颤器的疗效主要在动物和人类中使用电诱导VF进行了测试,但体外除颤器经常用于患者以终止自发性VF。

方法

方案1:通过放置在前-前(A-A)位置(左、右胸外侧)的电极,对9只犬施加双相截断指数(BTE)波形电击。在测量电诱导VF的DFT后,用血管成形术球囊在左前降支或左旋支冠状动脉中诱导急性缺血,并确定自发性VF的DFT。方案2:在一组12头猪中,确定A-A位置和前-后位置(A-P)电极的电诱导VF的DFT和自发性VF的DFT。方案3:在7头猪中确定电诱导VF的DFT。然后对自发性VF施加高达3次强度为电诱导VF DFT的1.5倍的电击。如果除颤未发生,则采用逐步递增方案直至除颤发生。

结果

方案1:电诱导VF的DFT为65±28 J(平均值±标准差),而自发性VF的DFT为226±97 J,p<0.05。方案2:对于A-A电极,电诱导VF的DFT为152±58 J,自发性VF的DFT为315±123 J。对于A-P电极,电诱导VF的DFT为100±43 J,自发性VF的DFT为206±114 J。方案3:强度为电诱导VF DFT的1.5倍(182±40 J)的电击有11/37次终止了心律失常。这些电击未终止的自发性VF发作需要高达400 J的能量水平才能除颤。

结论

急性缺血诱导的自发性VF的体外除颤比无缺血情况下60赫兹电流诱导的VF需要显著更多的能量。在BTE体外除颤器中,为使自发性VF除颤,安全裕度可能需要大于电诱导VF的DFT的1.5倍。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验