Why the study?
Does a train of stimuli traversing the protective zone alter the ventricular fibrillation threshold in chloralose-anesthetized dogs?
Does a train of stimuli traversing the protective zone alter the ventricular fibrillation threshold in chloralose-anesthetized dogs?
This preclinical study investigated whether engaging the protective zone alters the ventricular fibrillation threshold, though specific results are not provided in the truncated abstract.
Preclinical dog data should not inform clinical VF strategies; leaves open whether protective zone engagement alters VF threshold.
LOWN. Protective zone and the determination of vulnerabiLity to ventricuZar fibrillation. Am. J. Physiol. 234(5): H592H596, 1978 or Am. J. Physiol.: Heart Circ. Physiol. 3(5): H592-H596, 1978.-Delivery of a train of stimuli across the vulnerable period (VP) is a widely used method for assessing vulnerabil-ity to ventricular fibrillation (VF). We have found that a protective zone (PZ) closely adjoins the VP. When a fibrilla-tory stimulus is followed by a second stimulus that engages the PZ, VF is prevented. We therefore examined whether the VF threshold is altered by a train traversing the PZ. In 53 chloralose-anesthetized dogs, bipolar catheters were placed in the right ventricle for pacing and delivering test stimuli. VF thresholds were determined by scanning the VP with a 5-ms stimulus and a 100.Hz train. The timing of the trains was adjusted to occur at various intervals in relation to the VP
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Verrier et al. (1978) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: