Wavefront termination with monophasic and biphasic shocks: A simulation study

被引:0
|
作者
Trayanova, N [1 ]
Bray, MA [1 ]
机构
[1] Tulane Univ, Dept Biomed Engn, New Orleans, LA 70118 USA
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
This modeling study examines the effect of monophasic, and biphasic waveforms on the response of cardiac fiber to a defibrillation shock. Shocks of various strengths and coupling intervals (CIs) are delivered extracellularly during the relative refractory period. The results show that monophasic shock strengths of three times the diastolic threshold (DT) either elicit no response, or, for coupling intervals above 380ms, reinitiate propagation. In contrast, biphasic shocks of same strength are capable of terminating the existing wavefronts by invoking either a graded response (CIs 370 to 382ms) that prolongs the refractory period, or by inducing a propagation block (CIs above 400ms) that renders the fiber absolutely refractory. Biphasic shocks have only a small "vulnerable" window of coupling intervals over which propagation is reinitiated. Thus, the results obtained in this study offer a possible explanation of the mechanisms underlying the increased efficacy of biphasic defibrillation waveforms.
引用
收藏
页码:1289 / 1290
页数:2
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Transmembrane potential changes caused by monophasic and biphasic shocks
    Zhou, XH
    Smith, WM
    Justice, RK
    Wayland, JL
    Ideker, RE
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-HEART AND CIRCULATORY PHYSIOLOGY, 1998, 275 (05): : H1798 - H1807
  • [2] A comparison of biphasic and monophasic shocks for external defibrillation of humans
    Herre, JM
    Higgins, SL
    Epstein, AE
    Greer, S
    Friedman, PL
    Gleva, MJ
    Porterfield, JG
    Chapman, FW
    Finkel, ES
    Schmitt, PW
    Nova, RC
    Greene, HL
    CIRCULATION, 1998, 98 (17) : 173 - 173
  • [3] REFRACTORY PERIOD EXTENSION FOR MONOPHASIC VERSUS BIPHASIC SHOCKS
    SWEENEY, RJ
    GILL, RM
    REID, PR
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 1994, : A422 - A422
  • [4] Lidocaine increases the proarrhythmic effects of monophasic but not biphasic shocks
    Sims, JJ
    Miller, AW
    Ujhelyi, MR
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2001, 12 (12) : 1363 - 1368
  • [5] Biphasic shocks cause less dispersion of ventricular repolarization than monophasic shocks
    Itsuo, K
    Sakuma, I
    Shibata, N
    Niwa, R
    Honjo, H
    CIRCULATION, 1998, 98 (17) : 814 - 815
  • [6] BIPHASIC SHOCKS EXCITE REFRACTORY MYOCARDIUM LESS EFFECTIVELY THAN MONOPHASIC SHOCKS
    DAUBERT, JP
    FRAZIER, DW
    TANG, ASL
    HAGLER, JA
    SMITH, WM
    IDEKER, RE
    PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 1988, 11 (04): : 503 - 503
  • [7] COMPARISON OF BIPHASIC AND MONOPHASIC PULSES - DOES THE ADVANTAGE OF BIPHASIC SHOCKS DEPEND ON THE WAVESHAPE
    NATALE, A
    SRA, J
    KRUM, D
    DHALA, A
    DESHPANDE, S
    JAZAYERI, M
    AXTELL, K
    DEGROOT, P
    VANHOUT, WL
    AKHTAR, M
    PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 1995, 18 (07): : 1354 - 1361
  • [8] COMPARISON OF BIPHASIC AND MONOPHASIC SHOCKS FOR DEFIBRILLATION USING A NONTHORACOTOMY SYSTEM
    WYSE, DG
    KAVANAGH, KM
    GILLIS, AM
    MITCHELL, LB
    DUFF, HJ
    SHELDON, RS
    KIESER, TM
    MAITLAND, A
    FLANAGAN, P
    ROTHSCHILD, J
    MEHRA, R
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 1993, 71 (02): : 197 - 202
  • [9] EPICARDIAL MAPPING OF VENTRICULAR DEFIBRILLATION WITH MONOPHASIC AND BIPHASIC SHOCKS IN DOGS
    ZHOU, XH
    DAUBERT, JP
    WOLF, PD
    SMITH, WM
    IDEKER, RE
    CIRCULATION RESEARCH, 1993, 72 (01) : 145 - 160
  • [10] Open chest defibrillation: Biphasic versus monophasic waveform shocks
    Zhang, Y
    Davies, R
    Coddington, WJ
    Jones, J
    Kerber, RE
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2001, 37 (02) : 320S - 320S