TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of a novel rectilinear biphasic waveform with a damped sine wave monophasic waveform for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation
AU - Mittal, Suneet
AU - Ayati, Shervin
AU - Stein, Kenneth M.
AU - Knight, Bradley P.
AU - Morady, Fred
AU - Schwartzman, David
AU - Cavlovich, Doris
AU - Platia, Edward V.
AU - Calkins, Hugh
AU - Tchou, Patrick J.
AU - Miller, John M.
AU - Marcus Wharton, J.
AU - Sung, Ruey J.
AU - Slotwiner, David J.
AU - Markowitz, Steven M.
AU - Lerman, Bruce B.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported in part by grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (RO1–HL56139), the Rosenfeld Foundation, the Michael Wolk Foundation, New York, New York, and the Zoll Medical Corporation, Burlington, Massachusetts.
PY - 1999/11/1
Y1 - 1999/11/1
N2 - OBJECTIVES: We compared the efficacy of a novel rectilinear biphasic waveform, consisting of a constant current first phase, with a damped sine wave monophasic waveform during transthoracic defibrillation. BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have shown that for endocardial defibrillation, biphasic waveforms have a greater efficacy than monophasic waveforms. More recently, a 130-J truncated exponential biphasic waveform was shown to have equivalent efficacy to a 200-J damped sine wave monophasic waveform for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation. However, the optimal type of biphasic waveform is unknown. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, multicenter trial, 184 patients who underwent ventricular defibrillation were randomized to receive a 200-J damped sine wave monophasic or 120-J rectilinear biphasic shock. RESULTS: First-shock efficacy of the biphasic waveform was significantly greater than that of the monophasic waveform (99% vs. 93%, p = 0.05) and was achieved with nearly 60% less delivered current (14 ± 1 vs. 33 ± 7 A, p < 0.0001). Although the efficacy of the biphasic and monophasic waveforms was comparable in patients with an impedance ≥70 Ω (100% [biphasic] vs. 95% [monophasic], p = NS), the biphasic waveform was significantly more effective in patients with an impedance ≥70 Ω (99% [biphasic] vs. 86% [monophasic], p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a superior efficacy of rectilinear biphasic shocks as compared with monophasic shocks for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation, particularly in patients with a high transthoracic impedance. More important, biphasic shocks defibrillated with nearly 60% less current. The combination of increased efficacy and decreased current requirements suggests that biphasic shocks as compared with monophasic shocks advantageous for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation.
AB - OBJECTIVES: We compared the efficacy of a novel rectilinear biphasic waveform, consisting of a constant current first phase, with a damped sine wave monophasic waveform during transthoracic defibrillation. BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have shown that for endocardial defibrillation, biphasic waveforms have a greater efficacy than monophasic waveforms. More recently, a 130-J truncated exponential biphasic waveform was shown to have equivalent efficacy to a 200-J damped sine wave monophasic waveform for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation. However, the optimal type of biphasic waveform is unknown. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, multicenter trial, 184 patients who underwent ventricular defibrillation were randomized to receive a 200-J damped sine wave monophasic or 120-J rectilinear biphasic shock. RESULTS: First-shock efficacy of the biphasic waveform was significantly greater than that of the monophasic waveform (99% vs. 93%, p = 0.05) and was achieved with nearly 60% less delivered current (14 ± 1 vs. 33 ± 7 A, p < 0.0001). Although the efficacy of the biphasic and monophasic waveforms was comparable in patients with an impedance ≥70 Ω (100% [biphasic] vs. 95% [monophasic], p = NS), the biphasic waveform was significantly more effective in patients with an impedance ≥70 Ω (99% [biphasic] vs. 86% [monophasic], p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a superior efficacy of rectilinear biphasic shocks as compared with monophasic shocks for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation, particularly in patients with a high transthoracic impedance. More important, biphasic shocks defibrillated with nearly 60% less current. The combination of increased efficacy and decreased current requirements suggests that biphasic shocks as compared with monophasic shocks advantageous for transthoracic ventricular defibrillation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033230007&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033230007&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00363-0
DO - 10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00363-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 10551711
AN - SCOPUS:0033230007
SN - 0735-1097
VL - 34
SP - 1595
EP - 1601
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
IS - 5
ER -