Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2000 Oct 27;87(9):797-804.
doi: 10.1161/01.res.87.9.797.

The role of electroporation in defibrillation

Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

The role of electroporation in defibrillation

A Al-Khadra et al. Circ Res. .
Free article

Abstract

Electric shock is the only effective therapy against ventricular fibrillation. However, shocks are also known to cause electroporation of cell membranes. We sought to determine the impact of electroporation on ventricular conduction and defibrillation. We optically mapped electrical activity in coronary-perfused rabbit hearts during electric shocks (50 to 500 V). Electroporation was evident from transient depolarization, reduction of action potential amplitude, and upstroke dV/dt. Electroporation was voltage dependent and significantly more pronounced at the endocardium versus the epicardium, with thresholds of 229+/-81 versus 318+/-84 V, respectively (P=0.01, n=10), both being above the defibrillation threshold of 181.3+/-45.8 V. Epicardial electroporation was localized to a small area near the electrode, whereas endocardial electroporation was observed at the bundles and trabeculas throughout the entire endocardium. Higher-resolution imaging revealed that papillary muscles (n=10) were most affected. Electroporation and conduction block thresholds in papillary muscles were 281+/-64 V and 380+/-79 V, respectively. We observed no arrhythmia in association with electroporation. Further, preconditioning with high-energy shocks prevented reinduction of fibrillation by 50-V shocks, which were otherwise proarrhythmic. Endocardial bundles are the most susceptible to electroporation and the resulting conduction impairment. Electroporation is not associated with proarrhythmic effects and is associated with a reduction of vulnerability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources