The electrical parameter used to define defibrillation strength is energy. Peak current, however, may more accurately reflect the field quantities (i.e., electric field strength and current density) that mediate defibrillation and therefore should be a better clinical descriptor of threshold than energy. Though transthoracic impedance is a major determinant of energy-based threshold and is sensitive to operator-dependent changes in impedance (electrode-subject interface), an ideal threshold descriptor should be invariant with respect to these changes in impedance. We therefore compared the relative invariance of energy- and current-based thresholds when transthoracic impedance was altered by one of two methods: (a) change in electrode size (protocol A) or (b) change in electrode force (protocol B). In protocol A, impedance was altered in each dog by a mean of 95%. Energy thresholds determined at both low and high impedance were 44 +/- 21 J (mean +/- SD) and 105 +/- 35 J, respectively, P less than 0.0001. In contrast, peak current (A) thresholds were independent of transthoracic impedance, 22 +/- 5 A (low impedance) vs. 24 +/- 6 A (high impedance), P = NS. Energy and current thresholds showed a similar relationship for animals tested in protocol B. Therefore, current-based thresholds, in contrast to energy thresholds are independent of operator-dependent variables of transthoracic impedance and are invariant for a given animal. These results suggest that redefining defibrillation threshold in terms of peak current rather than energy provides a superior method of defibrillation.
B B Lerman, H R Halperin, J E Tsitlik, K Brin, C W Clark, O C Deale
Usage data is cumulative from September 2021 through September 2022.
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.