4.5 Article

Low-Energy Multistage Atrial Defibrillation Therapy Terminates Atrial Fibrillation With Less Energy Than a Single Shock

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCEP.111.965830

关键词

atrial fibrillation; defibrillation; cardioversion; vagal nerve stimulation

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 HL067322]
  2. CardiaLen, Inc

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-Implantable device therapy of atrial fibrillation (AF) is limited by pain from high-energy shocks. We developed a low-energy multistage defibrillation therapy and tested it in a canine model of AF. Methods and Results-AF was induced by burst pacing during vagus nerve stimulation. Our novel defibrillation therapy consisted of 3 stages: stage (ST) 1 (1-4 low-energy biphasic [BP] shocks), ST2 (6-10 ultralow-energy monophasic [MP] shocks), and ST3 (antitachycardia pacing). First, ST1 testing compared single or multiple MP and BP shocks. Second, several multistage therapies were tested: ST1 versus ST1+ST3 versus ST1+ST2+ST3. Third, 3 shock vectors were compared: superior vena cava to distal coronary sinus, proximal coronary sinus to left atrial appendage, and right atrial appendage to left atrial appendage. The atrial defibrillation threshold (DFT) of 1 BP shock was <1 MP shock (0.55 +/- 0.1 versus 1.38 +/- 0.31 J, P=0.003). Two to 3 BP shocks terminated AF with lower peak voltage than 1 BP or 1 MP shock and with lower atrial DFT than 4 BP shocks. Compared with ST1 therapy alone, ST1+ST3 lowered the atrial DFT moderately (0.51 +/- 0.46 versus 0.95 +/- 0.32 J, P=0.036), whereas 3-stage therapy (ST1+ST2+ST3) dramatically lowered the atrial DFT (0.19 +/- 0.12 versus 0.95 +/- 0.32 J for ST1 alone, P=0.0012). Finally, the 3-stage therapy was equally effective for all studied vectors. Conclusions-Three-stage electrotherapy significantly reduces the AF DFT and opens the door to low-energy atrial defibrillation at or below the pain threshold. (Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2011;4:917-925.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据