Key result
Direct-current countershock was compared to alternating-current countershock for the termination of ventricular tachycardia, but results are not provided in the truncated abstract.
Why the study?
Does direct-current countershock improve termination of ventricular tachycardia compared to alternating-current countershock in human beings?
Does direct-current countershock improve termination of ventricular tachycardia compared to alternating-current countershock in human beings?
This study aims to provide the first direct comparison of direct-current versus alternating-current countershock for the termination of ventricular arrhythmias in humans.
Results unavailable to guide DC vs AC selection in VT; leaves open superiority in humans.
THE combined use of external cardiac massage and external electric defibrillation, as developed by Kouwenhoven et al.1 and Zoll and his associates,2 has added new dimensions to the resuscitation of the fibrillating ventricle. Alternating-current countershock has proved its value in this and in the elective termination of less catastrophic arrhythmias.3 , 4 Recently, Lown and his co-workers5 showed that in dogs a direct-current discharge from a storage capacitor was safer and more effective than alternating-current countershock. To our knowledge this fact has not been substantiated in human beings. A direct comparison of the two methods in the termination of ventricular tachycardia and . . .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stanzler et al. (1963) studied Ventricular tachycardia. Direct-current countershock vs. Alternating-current countershock was evaluated on Termination of ventricular tachycardia. Direct-current countershock was compared to alternating-current countershock for the termination of ventricular tachycardia, but results are not provided in the truncated abstract.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: