Key result
Postshock redetection of ventricular fibrillation took a mean of 4.5 seconds compared to 5.5 seconds for initial detection (p=NS), though abnormal delays occurred in 18% of patients.
Why the study?
Does the time required for redetection of ventricular fibrillation after an unsuccessful shock differ from initial detection time in patients with transvenous ICD systems?
Population
n=22 patients undergoing induced ventricular fibrillation testing with an implantable…
Comparison
Postshock redetection of ventricular fibrillation vs Initial detection of ventricular fibrillation
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
Delayed postshock VF redetection occurs in 18% of patients; leaves open whether routine subthreshold testing improves safety with transvenous ICDs.
Observational (n=22)
Does the time required for redetection of ventricular fibrillation after an unsuccessful shock differ from initial detection time in patients with transvenous ICD systems?
Absolute Event Rate: 4.5% vs 5.5%
p-value: p=NS
Redetection of ventricular fibrillation after a subthreshold shock can be significantly delayed in a subset of patients, suggesting that routine device testing with intentional subthreshold shocks is necessary to verify postshock sensing.
Berul et al. (1995) conducted an observational in Ventricular fibrillation (n=22). Postshock redetection of ventricular fibrillation vs. Initial detection was evaluated on Time required for detection of ventricular fibrillation (seconds) (p=NS). Postshock redetection of ventricular fibrillation took a mean of 4.5 seconds compared to 5.5 seconds for initial detection (p=NS), though abnormal delays occurred in 18% of patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: