November 1, 1967Circulation ResearchOpen Access

Factors Determining Vulnerability to Ventricular Fibrillation Induced by 60-CPS Alternating Current

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Population

Anesthetized open-chest dogs

Comparison

60-cps alternating current applied directly to… vs Single square-wave pulse of 10 msec

Design

Preclinical

Authors

TSTsuneaki SugimotoKanazawa University SSStephen F. SchaalThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center AWAndrew G. WallaceUniversity of Greenwich

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Animal data show progressive VF threshold reduction during accelerating VT; hypothesis-generating for human mechanisms, no practice change.

Structured PICO

Population

Anesthetized open-chest dogs

Intervention

60-cps alternating current applied directly to the heart for varying durations (5 sec, or reduced to produce 4, 3, 2, or 1 ventricular response)

Comparator

Single square-wave pulse of 10 msec

Outcome

Current strength required to induce ventricular fibrillation (VF threshold)surrogate

Accelerating ventricular tachycardia produced by 60-cps stimulation progressively reduces the VF threshold after each premature ventricular response, allowing very weak currents to induce VF.

Cite This Study

Sugimoto et al. (1967) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a20e28110699ec7be2aafe6 https://doi.org/10.1161/01.res.21.5.601

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Animal data show progressive VF threshold reduction during accelerating VT; hypothesis-generating for human mechanisms, no practice change.

Factors Determining Vulnerability to Ventricular Fibrillation Induced by 60-CPS Alternating Current

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Structured PICO

Cite This Study

Factors Determining Vulnerability to Ventricular Fibrillation Induced by 60-CPS Alternating Current

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Structured PICO

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider