Kinetics of defibrillation shock-induced response: design implications for the optimal defibrillation waveform

被引:24
|
作者
Mowrey, KA
Cheng, Y
Tchou, PJ
Efimov, IR
机构
[1] Case Western Reserve Univ, Cleveland Clin Fdn, Dept Cardiol, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[2] Case Western Reserve Univ, Dept Biomed Engn, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
来源
EUROPACE | 2002年 / 4卷 / 01期
关键词
defibrillation; defibrillation shock waveforms; sudden cardiac death; cellular response to defibrillation shocks; virtual electrode; polarization;
D O I
10.1053/eupc.2001.0199
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is a well-established therapy for treating patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death. Recently formulated virtual electrode polarization theory is a promising foundation for the theory of defibrillation. Yet, continuing optimization of defibrillation therapy is limited to primarily empirical methods due to difficulties in assessing kinetics of cellular response in whole heart models of defibrillation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the response of the myocardium in the context of virtual electrode polarization. Methods and results We used a Langendorff-perfused rabbit heart model of ICD therapy and voltage-sensitive fluorescent dye imaging in order to map kinetics of transmembrane potential during both mono- and biphasic shocks applied at various phases of the QT-interval. Cellular response was fitted to a single exponential function using the Levenberg-Marquardt method. Time constants (tau) were measured in 45 288 optical records from 17 hearts. We found that cellular response depends upon both QT-phase of application, intensity, polarity, and phase of the biphasic waveform. Shocks of larger strengths produce a faster response. The tau of the first-phase negatively polarizing response was significantly larger compared with the positively polarizing response at intensities below 200 V, but smaller at 200 V and above. The tau of the second phase negatively polarizing response was always slower than the positively polarizing response, regardless of amplitude, and timing. Overall, tau ranged from 1.6 ms to 14.2 ms. Conclusions The time constant or the membrane depends on the field, action potential phase and the shock polarity, but exceeds I msec. Therefore, we suggest using a slower shock leading edge, since, the membrane cannot follow potentially damaging faster waveforms. (C) 2002 The European Society of Cardiology.
引用
收藏
页码:27 / 39
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Kinetics of defibrillation shock-induced response: design implications for the optimal defibrillation waveform
    Irnich, WE
    EUROPACE, 2003, 5 (03): : 243 - 243
  • [2] Kinetics of shock-induced transmembrane polarization: implications for defibrillation waveform optimization
    Mowrey, KA
    Cheng, Y
    Wollenzier, B
    Tchou, PJ
    Efimov, IR
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2000, 21 : 197 - 197
  • [3] SHOCK-INDUCED RESPONSE DURATION AND TYPE OF SUCCESSFUL DEFIBRILLATION
    TOVAR, OH
    BRANSFORD, PP
    MOUBARAK, JB
    MILNE, KB
    AMANNA, AE
    JONES, JL
    CIRCULATION, 1994, 90 (04) : 447 - 447
  • [4] The relationship of defibrillation and stimulation: design implications for the optimum defibrillation waveform
    Ideker, RE
    Fast, VG
    Walcott, GP
    EUROPACE, 2003, 5 (03): : 245 - 246
  • [5] Effects of lidocaine on shock-induced vulnerability and defibrillation
    Li, L
    Nikolski, V
    Wollenzier, BR
    Efimov, IR
    SECOND JOINT EMBS-BMES CONFERENCE 2002, VOLS 1-3, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS: BIOENGINEERING - INTEGRATIVE METHODOLOGIES, NEW TECHNOLOGIES, 2002, : 1451 - 1452
  • [6] Defibrillation: toward the optimal waveform shape
    Carranza, Gustavo
    REVISTA DE LA FEDERACION ARGENTINA DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2014, 43 (04): : 202 - 208
  • [7] Optimal response to cardiac arrest study: Defibrillation waveform effects
    Martens, PR
    Russell, JK
    Wolcke, B
    Paschen, H
    Kuisma, M
    Gliner, BE
    Weaver, WD
    Bossaert, L
    Chamberlain, D
    Schneider, T
    RESUSCITATION, 2001, 49 (03) : 233 - 243
  • [8] SHOCK-INDUCED REFRACTORY PERIOD EXTENSION AND PHARMACOLOGICAL MODULATION OF DEFIBRILLATION THRESHOLD
    MURAKAWA, Y
    SEZAKI, K
    INOUE, H
    USUI, M
    YAMASHITA, T
    AJIKI, K
    OIKAWA, N
    IWASAWA, K
    OMATA, M
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR PHARMACOLOGY, 1994, 23 (05) : 822 - 825
  • [9] Left ventricular geometry immediately following defibrillation: shock-induced relaxation
    De Jongh, AL
    Ramanathan, V
    Hoffmeister, BK
    Malkin, RA
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-HEART AND CIRCULATORY PHYSIOLOGY, 2003, 284 (03): : H815 - H819
  • [10] Dofetilide enhances shock-induced extension of refractoriness and lowers defibrillation threshold
    Davis, DR
    Beatch, GN
    Dickenson, DR
    Tang, ASL
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 1999, 15 (02) : 193 - 200