Key result
Squared esophageal electric fields strongly and inversely correlate with atrial defibrillation thresholds.
Why the study?
Defibrillation electrode placement affects the energy and number of shocks required to terminate AF. This study investigated the relationship between esophageal electric fields (EEFs) and atrial defibrillation thresholds (ADFTs) to determine the feasibility of using EEFs during a low-strength shock to predict patient-specific electrode placements.
May aid atrial defibrillation optimization; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common cardiac arrhythmia characterized by disorganized cardiac electrical activity. Defibrillation electrode placement has been shown to affect the amount of energy and number of shocks required to defibrillate. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between esophageal electric fields (EEFs) and atrial defibrillation thresholds (ADFTs) to determine the feasibility of using EEFs during a low-strength shock to predict patient-specific defibrillation electrode placements. METHODS: AF was induced and defibrillated according to a Bayesian four-shock protocol for 12-electrode placements in six pigs. EEFs were measured during each of the four shocks of the protocol and during a 1-J shock for each electrode placement. Squared EEFs (EEF(2) s) during all shocks were compared to the ADFTs using a linear regression. RESULTS: There was a negative relationship between EEF(2) s during the 1-J shocks and ADFTs, with median R(2) values of 0.863 and 0.840 for anterior-anterior (AA) and anterior-posterior (AP) electrode placements, respectively. There was a strong, positive relationship between applied energy and EEF(2) s, with median R(2) values of at least 0.866 for all animals. The placement with the highest EEF(2) resulted in the lowest ADFT for both AA and AP placements in four of six pigs. In the other two animals, this held for one electrode set but not both. CONCLUSIONS: There was a strong negative relationship between EEF(2) s during 1-J shocks and ADFTs for both AA and AP electrode placements. These preliminary results suggest that using EEF(2) s to predict patient-specific electrode placements is feasible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fitch et al. (2011) studied Atrial fibrillation (n=6). Esophageal electric field measurement during defibrillation shocks vs. 12 different anterior-anterior and anterior-posterior electrode placements was evaluated on Relationship between squared esophageal electric fields (EEF2) and atrial defibrillation thresholds (ADFTs) (Median R2 0.863 (AA) and 0.840 (AP)). Squared esophageal electric fields during 1-J shocks strongly and negatively correlated with atrial defibrillation thresholds (median R2 0.863 for AA and 0.840 for AP placements).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: