Key result
Biphasic stimulation significantly decreased the absolute ventricular refractory period (116 +/- 8 msec vs 136 +/- 15 msec, P<0.02) and required less current for excitation than monophasic stimulation.
Why the study?
Does biphasic stimulation decrease energy requirements for cardiac excitation compared to monophasic stimulation in animal models?
Does biphasic stimulation decrease energy requirements for cardiac excitation compared to monophasic stimulation in animal models?
Biphasic stimulation decreases the current required for cardiac excitation near the absolute refractory period by reactivating sodium current via a hyperpolarizing prepulse.
Biphasic stimulation may lower pacing energy needs in animal models; leaves open translation to human devices or practice.
The purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of monophasic and biphasic stimulation under conditions of full and incomplete repolarization in an in vivo dog model and in an in vitro rabbit ventricular single cell model. Strength-interval curves were constructed with monophasic cathodal stimulation and biphasic subthreshold anodal followed by cathodal stimulation in dogs prior to and late after left anterior descending coronary artery occlusion. At the monophasic absolute refractory period plus 10 msec, less cathodal current was required for biphasic compared to monophasic stimulation (P = 0.04). Moreover, the biphasic absolute ventricular refractory period (116 +/- 8 msec) was significantly shorter than the monophasic absolute ventricular refractory period (136 +/- 15 msec) (P less than 0.02). At coupling intervals greater than 30 msec after the monophasic absolute ventricular refractory period, there was no distinction between monophasic and biphasic stimuli. Similarly enhanced excitability was observed with biphasic stimuli in infarcted hearts. Voltage clamp measurements mimicking conditions of the in vivo studies demonstrated that when repolarization is incomplete, a hyperpolarizing prepulse reactivates additional sodium current resulting in enhanced excitability. In conclusion, biphasic stimulation consisting of a hyperpolarizing anodal prepulse followed by a cathodal pulse decreases the current required for excitation compared to cathodal monophasic stimulation in a critical zone near the ventricular absolute refractory period.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kavanagh et al. (1990) studied Cardiac stimulation. Biphasic stimulation vs. Monophasic cathodal stimulation was evaluated on Absolute ventricular refractory period (p=<0.02). Biphasic stimulation significantly decreased the absolute ventricular refractory period (116 +/- 8 msec vs 136 +/- 15 msec, P<0.02) and required less current for excitation than monophasic stimulation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: