Key result
With small surgical paddle electrodes, biphasic waveform shocks yielded a significantly higher percent of shock success than monophasic shocks at mid-energy levels from 7 to 20 J (P<0.01).
Why the study?
Do biphasic epicardial shocks improve defibrillation success compared to monophasic shocks in a swine model of ventricular fibrillation?
RCT (n=28)
Randomized
Do biphasic epicardial shocks improve defibrillation success compared to monophasic shocks in a swine model of ventricular fibrillation?
p-value: p=<0.01
Biphasic waveform shocks are more effective than monophasic shocks for open-chest epicardial defibrillation when using small paddle electrodes, but equally effective with large electrodes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Biphasic shocks may improve small-paddle epicardial defibrillation in swine VF; leaves open translation to human open-chest use.
Zhang et al. (2003) conducted an RCT in Ventricular fibrillation (n=28). Truncated exponential biphasic epicardial shocks vs. Damped sinusoidal monophasic epicardial shocks was evaluated on Percent shock success (p=<0.01). With small surgical paddle electrodes, biphasic waveform shocks yielded a significantly higher percent of shock success than monophasic shocks at mid-energy levels from 7 to 20 J (P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: