JACC
HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Coll Cardiol, 1994; 24:171-176
© 1994 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Keane, D
Right arrow Articles by Sowton, E
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Keane, D
Right arrow Articles by Sowton, E

Comparison of biphasic and monophasic waveforms in epicardial atrial defibrillation

D Keane, E Boyd, D Anderson, A Robles, P Deverall, R Morris, G Jackson, and E Sowton

Department of Cardiology, Guy's Hospital, London, England, United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES. Because biphasic waveforms have previously been shown to be more efficient than monophasic waveforms in defibrillation of the ventricle, we compared the efficiency of the two waveforms in defibrillation of the atria. BACKGROUND. The development of an implantable atrial defibrillator would offer significant advantages over current approaches to the management of atrial fibrillation. Patient tolerance of atrial shocks from such a device, however, would depend critically on the deployment of an efficient waveform. METHODS. Both the monophasic and biphasic shocks were of 8-ms duration, and the biphasic was a dual-capacitor waveform with equal first- and second-phase duration and leading-edge voltage. One hundred randomized atrial shocks were evaluated in 21 patients during cardiopulmonary bypass. Atrial fibrillation was induced by the application of alternating current. Atrial shocks were delivered through customized, contoured epicardial paddles applied to the posterior left atrial wall (surface area 11 cm2) and to the anterior right atrial wall (surface area 26 cm2). RESULTS. For the monophasic waveform the delivered energy (joules) associated with 50% success (E50) was 1.44 J (95% confidence interval [CI] 0 to 11.2) and with 80% (E80) success 3.9 J (95% CI 2.42 to 109.8); for the biphasic waveform 50% success was achieved with 0.37 J (95% CI 0.36 to 0.38) (p = NS) and 80% success with 0.57 J (95% CI 0.56 to 0.58) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS. A biphasic waveform is more efficient than a monophasic waveform in atrial defibrillation. This may have implications for the development of an implantable atrial defibrillator for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in addition to improvement of elective transthoracic and endocardial cardioversion of chronic atrial fibrillation.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
EuropaceHome page
S. J. Walsh, G. Manoharan, O. J. Escalona, J. Santos, N. Evans, J. McC. Anderson, M. Stevenson, J. D. Allen, and A.A. J. Adgey
Novel rectangular biphasic and monophasic waveforms delivered by a radiofrequency-powered defibrillator compared with conventional capacitor-based waveforms in transvenous cardioversion of atrial fibrillation.
Europace, October 1, 2006; 8(10): 873 - 880.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
A. L. Waldo
Low-Energy Atrial Defibrillation : A Promising New Technique
Circulation, September 1, 1998; 98(9): 833 - 834.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK
Copyright © 1994 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.