COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Evaluation of biphasic transthoracic defibrillation in an animal model of prolonged ventricular fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a biphasic defibrillation waveform (BDW) would produce a superior rate of converting prolonged ventricular fibrillation (VF) into a perfusing rhythm and delay the occurrence of asystole and/or pulseless electrical activity (PEA) during the resuscitation attempt, when compared with a monophasic defibrillation waveform (MDW).

METHODS: The authors performed a prospective, randomized, blinded experiment using an established swine model of prolonged VF. Thirty-four mixed-breed domestic swine (mean mass 22.9 kg) were sedated (ketamine/xylazine), anesthetized (isoflurane), and intubated. Aortic and femoral venous catheters were placed. ECG was monitored continuously. The animals were shocked into VF (3-s, 100-mA, 60-Hz shock), and were untreated for 8 minutes. Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) began with 1 minute of standardized (Thumper) chest compressions and ventilation. The animals were randomized to treatment with either BDW or MDW. Standard ACLS protocols were followed. The energy sequence was 2.5 J/kg first, 3.5 J/kg second, and 4.5 J/kg for all subsequent shocks. Outcome variables were time to event of asystole/PEA, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and one-hour survival. Data were analyzed with two-tailed Fisher's exact test and Kaplan-Meier survival plots (alpha = 0.05).

RESULTS: ROSC occurred more frequently in the BDW group (7/17) compared with the MDW group (1/17); p = 0.04. Survival analysis showed that the BDW significantly delayed the occurrence of asystole/PEA during the resuscitation attempt when compared with the MDW; log-ranked p = 0.02. One-hour survival rates (5/17 BDW and 1/17 MDW, p = 0.17) did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS: BDW resulted in a superior rate of ROSC and delay in the occurrence of asystole/ PEA during the resuscitation attempt when compared with MDW.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app