March 15, 1995Circulation

The 115-J biphasic pulse, 130-J biphasic pulse, and 200-J damped sine wave pulse were equally effective, all resulting in a 97% first-shock ventricular defibrillation efficacy rate.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Why the study?

Do low-energy biphasic truncated waveforms (115 J and 130 J) provide similar transthoracic defibrillation efficacy compared to standard 200-J damped sine wave pulses in cardiac arrest survivors?

Population

30 cardiac arrest survivors undergoing transvenous ICD surgery, mean age 61 +/- 11 years, 73% men. Mean LVEF…

Comparison

Low-energy biphasic truncated waveforms… vs Standard 200-J damped sine wave pulse.

Design

RCT, Each of the three different rescue shocks was tested in random order in…

Authors

GBGust H. Bardy BGBradford E. Gliner PKPeter J. Kudenchuk

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Supports compact AED development; confirms low-energy biphasic equivalence to damped sine wave in RCT.

Structured PICO

Do low-energy biphasic truncated waveforms (115 J and 130 J) provide similar transthoracic defibrillation efficacy compared to standard 200-J damped sine wave pulses in cardiac arrest survivors?

Population

30 cardiac arrest survivors undergoing transvenous ICD surgery, mean age 61 +/- 11 years, 73% men. Mean LVEF 0.39 +/- 0.14, coronary artery disease present in 73%.

Intervention

Low-energy biphasic truncated waveforms (115 J [70 microF] and 130 J [105 microF]) delivered via right anterior and left lateral thoracic pads.

Comparator

Standard 200-J (36-microF, 28-mH) damped sine wave pulse.

Outcome

First-shock ventricular defibrillation efficacy rate.

Low-energy biphasic truncated shocks (115 J and 130 J) are as effective as standard 200-J damped sine wave shocks for transthoracic defibrillation, supporting the development of smaller, more affordable AEDs.

Cite This Study

Bardy et al. (1995) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69f6f1afbc46ec1a8b7c64f6 https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.91.6.1768

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

March 15, 1995Circulation

The 115-J biphasic pulse, 130-J biphasic pulse, and 200-J damped sine wave pulse were equally effective, all resulting in a 97% first-shock ventricular defibrillation efficacy rate.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Why the study?

Do low-energy biphasic truncated waveforms (115 J and 130 J) provide similar transthoracic defibrillation efficacy compared to standard 200-J damped sine wave pulses in cardiac arrest survivors?

Population

30 cardiac arrest survivors undergoing transvenous ICD surgery, mean age 61 +/- 11 years, 73% men. Mean LVEF…

Comparison

Low-energy biphasic truncated waveforms… vs Standard 200-J damped sine wave pulse.

Design

RCT, Each of the three different rescue shocks was tested in random order in…

Authors

GBGust H. Bardy BGBradford E. Gliner PKPeter J. Kudenchuk

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Supports compact AED development; confirms low-energy biphasic equivalence to damped sine wave in RCT.

Structured PICO

Do low-energy biphasic truncated waveforms (115 J and 130 J) provide similar transthoracic defibrillation efficacy compared to standard 200-J damped sine wave pulses in cardiac arrest survivors?

Population

30 cardiac arrest survivors undergoing transvenous ICD surgery, mean age 61 +/- 11 years, 73% men. Mean LVEF 0.39 +/- 0.14, coronary artery disease present in 73%.

Intervention

Low-energy biphasic truncated waveforms (115 J [70 microF] and 130 J [105 microF]) delivered via right anterior and left lateral thoracic pads.

Comparator

Standard 200-J (36-microF, 28-mH) damped sine wave pulse.

Outcome

First-shock ventricular defibrillation efficacy rate.

Cite This Study

Bardy et al. (1995) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69f6f1afbc46ec1a8b7c64f6 https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.91.6.1768

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark