Determinants of successful transthoracic defibrillation and outcome in ventricular fibrillation
- PMID: 2054239
- PMCID: PMC1024673
- DOI: 10.1136/hrt.65.6.311
Determinants of successful transthoracic defibrillation and outcome in ventricular fibrillation
Abstract
Objective: To examine factors determining defibrillation success and outcome in patients with ventricular fibrillation.
Design: Observational prospective study of age, sex, transthoracic impedance, site of cardiac arrest, ventricular fibrillation duration and amplitude, primary or secondary ventricular fibrillation, aetiology, number of shocks to correct ventricular fibrillation, and drug treatment.
Setting: A teaching hospital and a mobile coronary care unit with a physician.
Patients: 70 consecutive patients (50 male, 20 female) mean age 66.5 years.
Interventions: Before the first countershock was administered transthoracic impedance using a 30 kHz low amplitude AC current passed through 8 cm/12 cm self-adhesive defibrillator electrode pads applied in the anteroapical position was measured. The first two shocks were 200 J delivered energy (low energy) and further shocks of 360 J (high energy) were given if required.
Main outcome measures: Countershock success and outcome from ventricular fibrillation.
Results and conclusions: First shock success was significantly greater in inhospital arrests (37/53) than in out-of-hospital arrests (5/17) and in those receiving antiarrhythmic treatment (13/15, 86.7%) v (27/51, 52.9%). Transthoracic impedance was similar in those who were successfully defibrillated with one or two 200 J shocks (98.7 (26) omega) and those who required one or more 360 J shocks (91.4 (23) omega). Success rates with two 200 J shocks were similar in those patients with "high" transthoracic impedance (that is, greater than 115 omega) and those with transthoracic impedance (less than or equal to 115 omega) (8/12 (67%) v 44/58 (76%]. Fine ventricular fibrillation was significantly more common in the patients with a transthoracic impedance of greater than 95 omega (41% (13/32] than in those with a transthoracic impedance less than or equal to 95 omega (13% (5/38]. Death during arrest was significantly more common in patients who needed high energy shocks (14/18 (78%] than in those who needed low energy shocks (16/52 (31%]. Multiple regression analysis identified ventricular fibrillation with an amplitude of greater than or equal to 0.5 mV, age less than or equal to 70 years, and arrests that needed less than or equal to two shocks for defibrillation, in rank order as independent predictors of survival to discharge.
Similar articles
-
Factors determining success and energy requirements for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation.Q J Med. 1990 Sep;76(281):903-13. Q J Med. 1990. PMID: 2236476
-
Factors determining success and energy requirements for cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: revised version.Q J Med. 1991 Jan;78(285):85-95. Q J Med. 1991. PMID: 1670068
-
Electrode pad size, transthoracic impedance and success of external ventricular defibrillation.Am J Cardiol. 1989 Oct 1;64(12):741-4. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(89)90757-1. Am J Cardiol. 1989. PMID: 2801525
-
[Analysis of ventricular fibrillation signals for the evaluation of defibrillation success in the treatment of ventricular fibrillation].Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2003 Dec;38(12):787-94. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-45401. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2003. PMID: 14666442 Review. German.
-
Innovative emergency defibrillation methods for refractory ventricular fibrillation in a variety of hospital settings.Am Heart J. 1993 Oct;126(4):962-8. doi: 10.1016/0002-8703(93)90713-j. Am Heart J. 1993. PMID: 8213456 Review.
Cited by
-
A Systematic Review of the Transthoracic Impedance during Cardiac Defibrillation.Sensors (Basel). 2022 Apr 6;22(7):2808. doi: 10.3390/s22072808. Sensors (Basel). 2022. PMID: 35408422 Free PMC article.
-
Analysis of transthoracic impedance during real cardiac arrest defibrillation attempts in older children and adolescents: are stacked-shocks appropriate?Resuscitation. 2010 Nov;81(11):1540-3. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.07.011. Epub 2010 Aug 13. Resuscitation. 2010. PMID: 20708836 Free PMC article.
-
How good is your defibrillation technique?J R Soc Med. 2005 Jan;98(1):3-6. doi: 10.1177/014107680509800102. J R Soc Med. 2005. PMID: 15632226 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
-
Monitoring normal and aberrant electrocardiographic activity from an endotracheal tube: comparison of the surface, esophageal, and tracheal electrocardiograms.J Clin Monit. 1994 Mar;10(2):81-90. doi: 10.1007/BF02886819. J Clin Monit. 1994. PMID: 8207457
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources