Transthoracic impedance study with large self-adhesive electrodes in two conventional positions for defibrillation

A stepwise external cardioversion protocol for atrial fibrillation to maximize acute success rate

AIMS

Cardioversion is a very commonly performed procedure for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there is no well-defined protocol to address failed external electrical direct current cardioversion. The aim of the study is to test the efficacy of a pre-defined stepwise cardioversion protocol for patients with persistent AF of ≤12 months. Success was the achievement of sinus rhythm.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study population included patients with persistent AF of ≤12 months duration requiring rhythm management. Patients were offered cardioversion using a pre-defined stepwise protocol using different electrode placement locations, applying compression at end of expiration, and higher energy delivered simultaneously through two defibrillators. : A total of 414 patients were included in the study, of which 362 (87.4%) required a single successful cardioversion. The remaining 52 (12.5%) patients required additional cardioversion attempts using the stepwise cardioversion protocol with an overall success rate of 99.3%. Two simultaneous defibrillators were required in 14 patients (3.4%). Patients with multiple cardioversions (13.5%) experienced more local skin irritation and pain compared with patients with single cardioversion (13.5% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.004). The predictor for the need for multiple cardioversion attempts is high body mass index, while high transthoracic impedance is associated with failed cardioversion. No major complications were observed during the study.

CONCLUSION

The stepwise cardioversion protocol has a high success rate of >99% and can be safely performed in outpatient or inpatient settings.

A Systematic Review of the Transthoracic Impedance during Cardiac Defibrillation

For cardiac defibrillator testing and design purposes, the range and limits of the human TTI is of high interest. Potential influencing factors regarding the electronic configurations, the electrode/tissue interface and patient characteristics were identified and analyzed. A literature survey based on 71 selected articles was used to review and assess human TTI and the influencing factors found. The human TTI extended from 12 to 212 Ω in the literature selected. Excluding outliers and pediatric measurements, the mean TTI recordings ranged from 51 to 112 Ω with an average TTI of 76.7 Ω under normal distribution. The wide range of human impedance can be attributed to 12 different influencing factors, including shock waveforms and protocols, coupling devices, electrode size and pressure, electrode position, patient age, gender, body dimensions, respiration and lung volume, blood hemoglobin saturation and different pathologies. The coupling device, electrode size and electrode pressure have the greatest influence on TTI.

A framework of current based defibrillation improves defibrillation efficacy of biphasic truncated exponential waveform in rabbits

Defibrillation is accomplished by the passage of sufficient current through the heart to terminate ventricular fibrillation (VF). Although current-based defibrillation has been shown to be superior to energy-based defibrillation with monophasic waveforms, defibrillators with biphasic waveforms still use energy as a therapeutic dosage. In the present study, we propose a novel framework of current-based, biphasic defibrillation grounded in transthoracic impedance (TTI) measurements: adjusting the charging voltage to deliver the desired current based on the energy setting and measured pre-shock TTI; and adjusting the pulse duration to deliver the desired energy based on the output current and intra-shock TTI. The defibrillation efficacy of current-based defibrillation was compared with that of energy-based defibrillation in a simulated high impedance rabbit model of VF. Cardiac arrest was induced by pacing the right ventricle for 60 s in 24 New Zealand rabbits (10 males). A defibrillatory shock was applied with one of the two defibrillators after 90 s of VF. The defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) at different pathway impedances were determined utilizing a 5-step up-and-down protocol. The procedure was repeated after an interval of 5 min. A total of 30 fibrillation events and defibrillation attempts were investigated for each animal. The pulse duration was significantly shorter, and the waveform tilt was much lower for the current-based defibrillator. Compared with energy-based defibrillation, the energy, peak voltage, and peak current DFT were markedly lower when the pathway impedance was > 120 Ω, but there were no differences in DFT values when the pathway impedance was between 80 and 120 Ω for current-based defibrillation. Additionally, peak voltage and the peak current DFT were significantly lower for current-based defibrillation when the pathway impedance was < 80 Ω. In sum, a framework of adjusting the charging voltage and shock duration to deliver constant energy for low impedance and constant current for high impedance via pre-shock and intra-shock impedance measurements, greatly improved the defibrillation efficacy of high impedance by lowering the energy DFT.

Dosimetry for Ventricular Fibrillation Risk with Short Electrical Pulses: History and Future

Electrical safety limits for unidirectional pulses with short durations are increasingly important due to the proliferation of electric-car and factory energy storage systems with potentially dangerous voltages. Electrocution by a short-duration direct-current pulse is not understood as well as that by alternating current and the data are limited. The primary international guidance comes from IEC 60479-2 section 11.

METHODS

We have analyzed the dosimetry for short pulse safety limits based on a fuller understanding of the scientific principles involved and human data. Implantable defibrillators have been tested by externally delivering short-duration pulses giving us human data which we analyze for this paper.

RESULTS

The present IEC current limit (60479-2:11) for short pulse durations is based on an exponent of -0.68 in the equation I = d^-0.68, (d being pulse width), while the correct exponent should be -1.0 given the constant charge for the VF threshold of short pulses. We also propose a baseline charge value based on the human data.

CONCLUSIONS

Charge-based VF thresholds give the correct dosimetry for short-duration pulses. Results from this paper should be considered in support of revising the IEC 60479-2 standard section 11.

Electric fence standards comport with human data and AC limits

INTRODUCTION

The ubiquitous electric fence is essential to modern agriculture and has saved lives by reducing the number of livestock automobile collisions. Modern safety standards such as IEC 60335-2-76 and UL 69 have played a role in this positive result. However, these standards are essentially based on energy and power (RMS current), which have limited direct relationship to cardiac effects. We compared these standards to bioelectrically more relevant units of charge and average current in view of recent work on VF (ventricular fibrillation) induction and to existing IEC AC current limits.

METHODS AND RESULTS

There are 3 limits for normal (low) pulsing rate: IEC energy limit, IEC current limit, and UL current limit. We then calculated the delivered charge allowed for each pulse duration for these limits and then compared them to a charge-based safety model derived from published human ventricular-fibrillation induction data. Both the IEC and UL also allow for rapid pulsing for up to 3 minutes. We calculated maximum outputs for various pulse durations assuming pulsing at 10, 20, and 30 pulses per second. These were then compared to standard utility power safety (AC) limits via the conversion factor of 7.4 to convert average current to RMS current for VF risk. The outputs of TASER electrical weapons (typically < 100 μC and ~100 μs duration) were also compared.

CONCLUSIONS

The IEC and UL electric fence energizer normal rate standards are conservative in comparison with actual human laboratory experiments. The IEC and UL electric fence energizer rapid-pulsing standards are consistent with accepted IEC AC current limits for commercially used pulse durations.

Electrical features of eighteen automated external defibrillators: a systematic evaluation

AIM

Assessment and comparison of the electrical parameters (energy, current, first and second phase waveform duration) among eighteen AEDs.

METHOD

Engineering bench tests for a descriptive systematic evaluation in commercially available AEDs. AEDs were tested through an ECG simulator, an impedance simulator, an oscilloscope and a measuring device detecting energy delivered, peak and average current, and duration of first and second phase of the biphasic waveforms. All tests were performed at the engineering facility of the Lombardia Regional Emergency Service (AREU).

RESULTS

Large variations in the energy delivered at the first shock were observed. The trend of current highlighted a progressive decline concurrent with the increases of impedance. First and second phase duration varied substantially among the AEDs using the exponential biphasic waveform, unlike rectilinear waveform AEDs in which phase duration remained relatively constant.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a large variability in the electrical features of the AEDs tested. Energy is likely not to be the best indicator for strength dose selection. Current and shock duration should be both considered when approaching the technical features of AEDs. These findings may prompt further investigations to define the optimal current and duration of the shock waves to increase the success rate in the clinical setting.

Update on cardiopulmonary resuscitation guidelines of interest to anesthesiologists

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The new cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guidelines emphasize the importance of high-quality chest compressions and modify some routines. The objective of this report was to review the main changes in resuscitation practiced by anesthesiologists.

CONTENTS

The emphasis on high-quality chest compressions with adequate rate and depth allowing full recoil of the chest and with minimal interruptions is highlighted in this update. One should not take more than ten seconds checking the pulse before starting CPR. The universal relationship of 30:2 is maintained, modifying its order, initiating with chest compressions, followed by airways and breathing (C-A-B instead of A-B-C). The procedure "look, listen, and feel whether the patient is breathing" was removed from the algorithm, and the use of cricoid pressure during ventilations is not recommended any more. The rate of chest compressions was changed for at least one hundred per minute instead of approximately one hundred per minute, and its depth in adults was changed to 5 cm instead of the prior recommendation of 4 to 5 cm. The single shock is maintained, and it should be of 120 to 200 J when it is biphasic; and 360 J when it is monophasic. In advanced cardiac life support, the use of capnography and capnometry to confirm intubation and monitoring the quality of CPR is a formal recommendation. Atropine is no longer recommended for routine use in the treatment of pulseless electrical activity or asystole.

CONCLUSIONS

Updating the phases of the new CPR guidelines is important, and continuous learning is recommended. This will improve the quality of resuscitation and survival of patients in cardiac arrest.

Analysis of transthoracic impedance during real cardiac arrest defibrillation attempts in older children and adolescents: are stacked-shocks appropriate?

BACKGROUND

In 2005, the AHA changed the treatment recommendation for shockable rhythms from 3 transthoracic stacked-shocks to a single shock followed by immediate chest compressions. The stacked-shock recommendation was based on low first-shock efficacy of monophasic waveforms and the theoretical decrease in transthoracic impedance (TTI) following each shock. The objective of this study was to characterize TTI following biphasic defibrillation attempts in children ≥ 8 yrs during cardiac arrest to assess whether a stacked-shock approach may be appropriate to improve defibrillation success.

METHODS

TTI (Ohms (Ω)) was collected via standard anterior-apical defibrillator electrode pads during consecutive in-hospital cardiac arrest biphasic defibrillation attempts in children ≥ 8 yrs. Analytic data points for TTI were: 0.1s pre-shock (baseline); post-shock at 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 s. TTI variables analyzed with descriptive summaries/paired t-test. p values < 0.05 considered statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

Analysis yielded 13 evaluable shock events during 5 cardiac arrests (mean age 14.3 ± 5 yrs, weight 47.4 ± 7.3 kg) between September 2006 and May 2009. Compared to 0.1s pre-shock baseline values (56.8 ± 23.4 Ω), TTI was significantly lower immediately 0.1s post-shock (55.2 ± 22.2 Ω, p = 0.003). Post-shock mean difference from baseline was 1.6 Ω at 0.1s (p = 0.015), 1.4 Ω at 0.5s (p = 0.019) 1.4 Ω at 1.0 s (p = 0.023), 1.1 Ω at 1.5 s (p = 0.028), and 0.95 Ω at 2.0 s (p = 0.096). Time to recharge our clinical defibrillators to standard biphasic shock dose was 2.80 ± 0.05 s.

CONCLUSIONS

During cardiac arrests in children ≥ 8 yrs, TTI decreased after biphasic shocks, but the limited magnitude and duration of TTI changes suggest that stacked-shocks would not improve defibrillation success.

A comparison of defibrillation efficacy between different impedance compensation techniques in high impedance porcine model

AIM OF STUDY

Impedance compensation methods differ markedly among manufacturers and can play an important role in defibrillation success. In this study we compared the efficacy of two different commercial defibrillators based on defibrillation success in a high impedance porcine model of cardiac arrest. The first defibrillator (A) compensates high impedance by controlling current with fixed shock duration, while the second defibrillator (B) by prolonging the shock duration.

METHODS

In 10 domestic male pigs weighing between 17 and 28 kg, ventricular fibrillation was electrically induced and untreated for 15s. Animals were randomized to receive defibrillations with either defibrillator A or defibrillator B, at maximum energy settings of which were 200 J for the defibrillator A and 360 J for the defibrillator B. A grouped up-down defibrillation threshold testing protocol was used to compare the success rate between the two defibrillators. A variable resistance, ranging from 80 to 200 ohm was placed in series with the defibrillation pads. After a recovery interval of 5 min, the sequence was repeated for a total of 60 test shocks for each animal.

RESULTS

The measured total pathway impedance was in a range of 108-278 ohm. The combined success rate was 49.5% for the two defibrillators in a total of 600 testing shocks. The success rate was significantly higher when the defibrillator A was employed in comparison with defibrillator B (63% vs. 36%, p=0.0001).

CONCLUSION

For transthoracic impedances greater than average, the current-based compensation technique was more effective than the duration-based compensation technique.