• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

A prospective evaluation of two defibrillation safety margin techniques in patients with low defibrillation energy requirements.

作者信息

Strickberger S A, Man K C, Souza J, Zivin A, Weiss R, Knight B P, Goyal R, Daoud E G, Morady F

机构信息

University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor 48109-0022, USA.

出版信息

J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 1998 Jan;9(1):41-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.1998.tb00865.x.

DOI:10.1111/j.1540-8167.1998.tb00865.x
PMID:9475576
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

In patients undergoing defibrillator implantation, an appropriate defibrillation safety margin has been considered to be either 10 J or an energy equal to the defibrillation energy requirement. However, a previous clinical report suggested that a larger safety margin may be required in patients with a low defibrillation energy requirement. Therefore, the purpose of this prospective study was to compare the defibrillation efficacy of the two safety margin techniques in patients with a low defibrillation energy requirement.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Sixty patients who underwent implantation of a defibrillator and who had a low defibrillation energy requirement (< or = 6 J) underwent six separate inductions of ventricular fibrillation, at least 5 minutes apart. For each of the first three inductions of ventricular fibrillation, the first two shocks were equal to either the defibrillation energy requirement plus 10 J (14.6+/-1.0 J), or to twice the defibrillation energy requirement (9.9+/-2.3 J). The alternate technique was used for the subsequent three inductions of ventricular fibrillation. For each induction of ventricular fibrillation, the first shock success rate was 99.5%+/-4.3% for shocks using the defibrillation energy requirement plus 10 J, compared to 95.0%+/-17.2% for shocks at twice the defibrillation energy requirement (P = 0.02). The charge time (P < 0.0001) and the total duration of ventricular fibrillation (P < 0.0001) were each approximately 1 second longer with the defibrillation energy requirement plus 10 J technique.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to compare prospectively the defibrillation efficacy of two defibrillation safety margins. In patients with a defibrillation energy requirement < or = 6 J, a higher rate of successful defibrillation is achieved with a safety margin of 10 J than with a safety margin equal to the defibrillation energy requirement.

摘要

相似文献

1
A prospective evaluation of two defibrillation safety margin techniques in patients with low defibrillation energy requirements.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 1998 Jan;9(1):41-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.1998.tb00865.x.
2
Probability of successful defibrillation at multiples of the defibrillation energy requirement in patients with an implantable defibrillator.
Circulation. 1997 Aug 19;96(4):1217-23. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.96.4.1217.
3
Relationship between shock energy and postdefibrillation ventricular arrhythmias in patients with implantable defibrillators.植入式心脏除颤器患者电击能量与除颤后室性心律失常的关系。
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 1999 Mar;10(3):370-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.1999.tb00685.x.
4
Inductionless or limited shock testing is possible in most patients with implantable cardioverter- defibrillators/cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators: results of the multicenter ASSURE Study (Arrhythmia Single Shock Defibrillation Threshold Testing Versus Upper Limit of Vulnerability: Risk Reduction Evaluation With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantations).大多数植入式心脏复律除颤器/心脏再同步治疗除颤器患者可行无诱导或有限电击测试:多中心ASSURE研究(心律失常单次电击除颤阈值测试与易损性上限:植入式心脏复律除颤器植入的风险降低评估)结果
Circulation. 2007 May 8;115(18):2382-9. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.663112. Epub 2007 Apr 30.
5
Prospective randomized comparison of two defibrillation safety margins in unipolar, active pectoral defibrillator therapy.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2003 Feb;26(2 Pt 1):613-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1460-9592.2003.00102.x.
6
Upper limit of vulnerability is a good estimator of shock strength associated with 90% probability of successful defibrillation in humans with transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.易损性上限是经静脉植入式心脏复律除颤器的人类患者中与90%成功除颤概率相关的电击强度的良好估计指标。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Apr;27(5):1112-8. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00603-6.
7
Long-term evaluation of the ventricular defibrillation energy requirement.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 1998 Sep;9(9):916-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.1998.tb00132.x.
8
Low-energy endocardial defibrillation using an axillary or a pectoral thoracic electrode location.使用腋窝或胸壁电极位置进行低能量心内膜除颤。
Circulation. 1993 Dec;88(6):2655-60. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.88.6.2655.
9
High defibrillation energy requirements are encountered rarely with modern dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems.在现代双腔植入式心脏复律除颤器系统中,很少会遇到高除颤能量需求的情况。
Europace. 2008 Mar;10(3):347-50. doi: 10.1093/europace/eun027.
10
Truncated biphasic pulses for transthoracic defibrillation.用于经胸除颤的截断双相脉冲
Circulation. 1995 Mar 15;91(6):1768-74. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.91.6.1768.

引用本文的文献

1
[Not Available].[无可用内容]。
Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol. 2000 Jan;11 Suppl 1:49-50. doi: 10.1007/BF03042525.