Zhang Yi, Boddicker Kimberly A, Davies Loyd R, Jones Janice L, Kerber Richard E
Cardiovascular Center, College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2004 Jul;27(7):941-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2004.00563.x.
Triphasic shocks have been evaluated for endocardial defibrillation but not for open-chest epicardial defibrillation. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of biphasic versus triphasic shocks for epicardial defibrillation in a porcine model. Twenty-two adult swine (18-28 kg) were deeply anesthetized and intubated. After 30 seconds electrically induced VF, each pig received truncated exponential biphasic (7.2-ms positive pulse duration and 7.2-ms negative pulse duration, total waveform duration 14.4 ms) and triphasic (4.8/4.8/4.8 ms, total waveform duration 14.4 ms) epicardial shocks. Pigs in group 1 (n = 11) received epicardial biphasic and triphasic shocks from large hand held paddle electrodes (44.2 cm2); pigs in group 2 (n = 11) received shocks from small paddle electrodes (15.9 cm2). Shocks were given at five selected energy levels (3-30 J) in random sequence. Four shocks were delivered at each energy level to construct an energy versus percentage of success curve. In group 1 (large paddle electrodes), percentage of shock success was significantly higher for triphasic shocks at the energy levels of 3, 5, 10, and 20 J compared to biphasic shocks. In group 2 (small paddle electrodes), triphasic shocks yielded a significantly higher percentage of shock success than biphasic shocks at the energy levels of 5, 10, and 20 J). Shock induced ventricular tachycardia was similar for both waveforms; asystole was rare. For open-chest defibrillation, triphasic waveform shocks were superior to biphasic waveform shocks for VF termination at energy levels of 3-20 J and were as safe as biphasic shocks.
已经对三相电击用于心内膜除颤进行了评估,但尚未对开胸心外膜除颤进行评估。本研究的目的是在猪模型中比较双相电击与三相电击用于心外膜除颤的疗效和安全性。22只成年猪(18 - 28千克)被深度麻醉并插管。在电诱导室颤30秒后,每只猪接受截断指数双相(正脉冲持续时间7.2毫秒,负脉冲持续时间7.2毫秒,总波形持续时间14.4毫秒)和三相(4.8/4.8/4.8毫秒,总波形持续时间14.4毫秒)心外膜电击。第1组(n = 11)的猪接受来自大型手持极板电极(44.2平方厘米)的心外膜双相和三相电击;第2组(n = 11)的猪接受来自小型极板电极(15.9平方厘米)的电击。以随机顺序在五个选定的能量水平(3 - 30焦耳)给予电击。在每个能量水平给予四次电击以构建能量与成功百分比曲线。在第1组(大型极板电极)中,与双相电击相比,在3、5、10和20焦耳能量水平下,三相电击的电击成功率显著更高。在第2组(小型极板电极)中,在5、10和20焦耳能量水平下,三相电击产生的电击成功率显著高于双相电击。两种波形引起的室性心动过速相似;心脏停搏很少见。对于开胸除颤,在3 - 20焦耳能量水平下,三相波形电击在终止室颤方面优于双相波形电击,并且与双相电击一样安全。