EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Performance of a rectilinear biphasic waveform in defibrillation of presenting and recurrent ventricular fibrillation: a prospective multicenter study



Performance of a rectilinear biphasic waveform in defibrillation of presenting and recurrent ventricular fibrillation: a prospective multicenter study



Resuscitation 82(6): 685-689



We tested the hypothesis that shock success differs with initial and recurrent episodes of ventricular fibrillation (VF). From September 2008 to March 2010 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with VF as the initial rhythm at 9 study sites were defibrillated by paramedics using a rectilinear biphasic waveform. Shock success was defined as termination of VF within 5s post-shock. We used generalized estimating equation (GEE) analysis to assess the association between shock type (initial versus refibrillation) and shock success. Ninety-four patients presented in VF. Mean age was 65.4 years, 78.7% were male, and 80.9% were bystander-witnessed. VF recurred in 75 (79.8%). There were 338 shocks delivered for initial (n = 90) or recurrent (n = 248) VF available for analysis. Initial shocks terminated VF in 79/90 (87.8%) and subsequent shocks in 209/248 (84.3%). GEE odds ratio (OR) for shock type was 1.37 (95% CI 0.68-2.74). After adjusting for potential confounders, the OR for shock type remained insignificant (1.33, 95% CI 0.60-2.53). We observed no significant difference in ROSC (54.7% versus 52.6%, absolute difference 2.1%, p = 0.87) or neurologically intact survival to hospital discharge (21.9% versus 33.3%, absolute difference 11.4%, p = 0.31) between those with and without VF recurrence. Presenting VF was terminated with one shock in 87.8% of cases. We observed no significant difference in the frequency of shock success between initial versus recurrent VF. VF recurred in the majority of patients and did not adversely affect shock success, ROSC, or survival.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 054926710

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 21397382

DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.02.008



Related references

Comparison of efficacy of pulsed biphasic waveform and rectilinear biphasic waveform in a short ventricular fibrillation pig model. Resuscitation 80(9): 1047-1051, 2009

Comparison of a novel rectilinear biphasic waveform with a damped sine wave monophasic waveform for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 34(5): 1595-1601, 1999

Prospective randomized comparison of rectilinear biphasic waveform shock versus truncated exponential biphasic waveform shock for transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 41(6 Supplement A): 138A, March 19, 2003

Comparison of rectilinear biphasic waveform with biphasic truncated exponential waveform in a pediatric defibrillation model. Critical Care Medicine 35(8): 1961-1965, 2007

Transthoracic incremental monophasic versus biphasic defibrillation by emergency responders (TIMBER): a randomized comparison of monophasic with biphasic waveform ascending energy defibrillation for the resuscitation of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation. Circulation 114(19): 2010-2018, 2006

Comparison of rectilinear biphasic waveform energy versus truncated exponential biphasic waveform energy for transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. American Journal of Cardiology 94(11): 1438-1440, 2004

A comparison of biphasic and monophasic waveform defibrillation after prolonged ventricular fibrillation. Chest 120(3): 948-954, 2001

Rectilinear biphasic waveform defibrillation of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Prehospital Emergency Care 8(4): 388-392, 2005

Comparison of the rectilinear biphasic waveform with the monophasic damped sine waveform for external cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and flutter. American Journal of Cardiology 93(12): 1495-1499, 2004

Resuscitation after prolonged ventricular fibrillation with use of monophasic and biphasic waveform pulses for external defibrillation. Circulation 101(25): 2968-2974, June 27, 2000

Transthoracic defibrillation of short-lasting ventricular fibrillation: a randomised trial for comparison of the efficacy of low-energy biphasic rectilinear and monophasic damped sine shocks. Acta Cardiologica 57(5): 329-334, 2002

Biphasic waveform external defibrillation thresholds for spontaneous ventricular fibrillation secondary to acute ischemia. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 39(2): 359-365, January 16, 2002

Prospective evaluation of the effect of of biphasic waveform defibrillation on ventricular pacing thresholds. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology 8(5): 485-495, 1997