This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Please enable it to take advantage of the complete set of features!

Skip to main page content

Add to Collections

Your saved search

Name of saved search:

Search terms:

Test search terms

Would you like email updates of new search results?

Yes
No

Email: (change)

Frequency:

Which day?

Which day?

Report format:

Send at most:

Send even when there aren't any new results

Optional text in email:

Your RSS Feed

Comment

. 2007 May;4(5):690; author reply 690.

doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.01.032. Epub 2007 Feb 1.

Is stepped defibrillation waveform really more efficient than 50/50% tilt biphasic waveform?

PMID: 17467646
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.01.032

Comment

Is stepped defibrillation waveform really more efficient than 50/50% tilt biphasic waveform?

Werner Irnich. Heart Rhythm. 2007 May.

. 2007 May;4(5):690; author reply 690.

doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.01.032. Epub 2007 Feb 1.

Author

PMID: 17467646
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.01.032

No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment on

Stepped defibrillation waveform is substantially more efficient than the 50/50% tilt biphasic.
Seidl K, Denman RA, Moulder JC, Mouchawar G, Stoeppler C, Becker T, Weise U, Anskey EJ, Burnett HE, Kroll MW. Seidl K, et al. Heart Rhythm. 2006 Dec;3(12):1406-11. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2006.08.017. Epub 2006 Aug 25. Heart Rhythm. 2006. PMID: 17161781 Clinical Trial.

Publication types

Actions
Actions

MeSH terms

Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
- ClinicalKey
- Elsevier Science
Other Literature Sources
- The Lens - Patent Citations Database
Medical
- MedlinePlus Health Information