© 2002 by European Society of Cardiology
DEFIBRILLATORS
Kinetics of defibrillation shock-induced response: design implications for the optimal defibrillation waveform
Department of Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation and Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A.
Manuscript submitted 4 June 2001. Accepted after revision 11 October 2001.
Correspondence: Igor R. Efimov, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44106-7207, U.S.A. E-mail: ire{at}po.cwru.edu
Key Words: Defibrillation, defibrillation shock waveforms, sudden cardiac death, cellular response to defibrillation shocks, virtual electrode, polarization
Introduction
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is a well-established therapy for treating patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death. Recently formulated virtual electrode polarization theory is a promising foundation for the theory of defibrillation. Yet, continuing optimization of defibrillation therapy is limited to primarily empirical methods due to difficulties in assessing kinetics of cellular response in whole heart models of defibrillation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the response of the myocardium in the context of virtual electrode polarization.
Methods and results
We used a Langendorff-perfused rabbit heart model of ICD therapy and voltage-sensitive fluorescent dye imaging in order to map kinetics of transmembrane potential during both mono- and biphasic shocks applied at various phases of the QT-interval. Cellular response was fitted to a single exponential function using the Levenberg-Marquardt method. Time constants (
) were measured in 45 288 optical records from 17 hearts. We found that cellular response depends upon both QT-phase of application, intensity, polarity, and phase of the biphasic waveform. Shocks of larger strengths produce a faster response. The of the first-phase negatively polarizing response was significantly larger compared with the positively polarizing response at intensities below 200 V, but smaller at 200 V and above. The of the second phase negatively polarizing response was always slower than the positively polarizing response, regardless of amplitude, and timing. Overall, ranged from 1·6 ms to 14·2 ms.
Conclusions
The time constant of the membrane depends on the field, action potential phase and the shock polarity, but exceeds 1 msec. Therefore, we suggest using a slower shock leading edge, since the membrane cannot follow potentially damaging faster waveforms.
References
[2] Mirowski M, Reid PR, Mower MM. Termination of malignant ventricular arrhythmias with an implanted automatic defibrillator in human beings. N Engl J Med 1980; 303: 322–324.
[3] Blanchard SM and Ideker RE, et al. Mechanisms of electrical defibrillation: impact of new experimental defibrillator waveforms. Am Heart J 1994; 127: 970–977.
[4] Chapman PD, Vetter JW, Souza JJ, Troup PJ, Wetherbee JN, Hoffmann RG. Comparative efficacy of monophasic and biphasic truncated exponential shocks for nonthoracotomy internal defibrillation in dogs. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988; 12: 739–745.
[5] Dixon EG, Tang AS, Wolf PD, et al. Improved defibrillation thresholds with large contoured epicardial electrodes and biphasic waveforms. Circulation 1987; 76: 1176–1184.
[6] Jones JL and Jones RE. Improved defibrillator waveform safety factor with biphasic waveforms. Am J Physiol 1983; 245: H60–65.
[7] Kavanagh KM, Tang AS, Rollins DL, Smith WM, Ideker RE. Comparison of the internal defibrillation thresholds for monophasic and double and single capacitor biphasic waveforms. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989; 14: 1343–1349.
[8] Neuzner J. Clinical experience with a new cardioverter defibrillator capable of biphasic waveform pulse and enhanced data storage: results of a prospective multicenter study. European Ventak P2 Investigator Group. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1994; 17: 1243–1255.
[9] Walcott GP, Walcott KT, Knisley SB, Zhou X, Ideker RE. Mechanisms of defibrillation for monophasic and biphasic waveforms. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1994; 17: 478–498.
[10] Leonelli FM, Kroll MW, Brewer JE. Defibrillation thresholds are lower with smaller storage capacitors. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1995; 18: 1661–1665.
[11] Rist K, Tchou PJ, Mowrey K, Kroll MW, Brewer JE. Smaller capacitors improve the biphasic waveform. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1994; 5: 771–776.
[12] Schauerte P, Schondube FA, Grossmann M, et al. Influence of phase duration of biphasic waveforms on defibrillation energy requirements with a 70-microF capacitance. Circulation 1998; 97: 2073–2078.
[13] Walcott GP, Rollins DL, Smith WM, Ideker RE. Effect of changing capacitors between phases of a biphasic defibrillation shock. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1996; 19: 945–954.
[14] Yamanouchi Y, Mowrey KA, Nadzam GR, et al. Large change in voltage at phase reversal improves biphasic defibrillation thresholds. Parallel-series mode switching. Circulation 1996; 94: 1768–1773.
[15] Yamanouchi Y, Brewer JE, Mowrey KA, et al. Sawtooth first phase biphasic defibrillation waveform: a comparison with standard waveform in clinical devices. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1997; 8: 517–528.
[16] Yamanouchi Y, Fishler MG, Mowrey KA, Wilkoff BL, Mazgalev TN, Tchou PJ. New approach to biphasic waveforms for internal defibrillation: fully discharging capacitors. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2000; 11: 907–912.
[17] Poole JE, Kudenchuk PJ, Dolack GL, et al. A prospective randomized comparison in humans of 90-mu F and 120-mu F biphasic pulse defibrillation using a unipolar defibrillation system. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1995; 6: 1097–1100.
[18] Swerdlow CD, Kass RM, Davie S, Chen PS, Hwang C. Short biphasic pulses from 90 microfarad capacitors lower defibrillation threshold. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1996; 19: 1053–1060.
[19] Winkle RA, Mead RH, Ruder MA, et al. Long-term outcome with the automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989; 13: 1353–1361.
[20] Fishler MG. Theoretical predictions of the optimal monophasic and biphasic defibrillation waveshapes. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2000; 47: 59–67.
[21] Irnich W. Optimal truncation of defibrillation pulses [corrected and republished in Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1995 Jun; 18: 673–88]. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1995; 18: 673–688.
[22] Kroll MW. A minimal model of the monophasic defibrillation pulse. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1993; 16: 769–777.
[23] Kroll MW. A minimal model of the single capacitor biphasic defibrillation waveform. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1994; 17: 1782–1792.
[24] Walcott GP, Walker RG, Cates AW, Krassowska W, Smith WM, Ideker RE. Choosing the optimal monophasic and biphasic waveforms for ventricular defibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1995; 6: 737–750.
[25] White JB, Walcott GP, Wayland JL Jr, Smith WM, Ideker RE. Predicting the relative efficacy of shock waveforms for transthoracic defibrillation in dogs. Ann Emerg Med 1999; 34: 309–320.
[26] Natale A, Sra J, Dhala A, et al. Effects of initial polarity on defibrillation threshold with biphasic pulses. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1995; 18: 1889–1893.
[27] Thakur RK, Souza JJ, Chapman PD, Troup PJ, Wetherbee JN. Electrode polarity is an important determinant of defibrillation efficacy using a nonthoracotomy system. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1994; 17: 919–923.
[28] Strickberger SA, Man KC, Daoud E, et al. Effect of first-phase polarity of biphasic shocks on defibrillation threshold with a single transvenous lead system. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 25: 1605–1608.
[29] Usui M, Walcott GP, Strickberger SA, Rollins DL, Smith WM, Ideker RE. Effects of polarity for monophasic and biphasic shocks on defibrillation efficacy with an endocardial system. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1996; 19: 65–71.
[30] Yamanouchi Y, Mowrey KA, Nadzam GR, et al. Effects of polarity on defibrillation thresholds using a biphasic waveform in a hot can electrode system. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1997; 20: 2911–2916.
[31] Hsu W, Lin Y, Heil JE, Jones J, Lang DJ. Effect of shock timing on defibrillation success. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1997; 20: 153–157.
[32] Hsu W, Lin Y, Lang DJ, Jones JL. Shock timing lowers transvenous defibrillation energy requirement. J Electrocardiol 1998; 31: 35–40.
[33] Li HG, Yee R, Mehra R, et al. Effect of shock timing on efficacy and safety of internal cardioversion for ventricular tachycardia. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 24: 703–708.
[34] Cheng Y, Mowrey KA, Van Wagoner DR, Tchou PJ, Efimov IR. Virtual electrode-induced reexcitation: A mechanism of defibrillation. Circ Res 1999; 85: 1056–1066.
[35] Knisley SB, Hill BC, Ideker RE. Virtual electrode effects in myocardial fibers. Biophys J 1994; 66: 719–728.
[36] Wikswo JP Jr, Lin SF, Abbas RA. Virtual electrodes in cardiac tissue: a common mechanism for anodal and cathodal stimulation. Biophys J 1995; 69: 2195–2210.
[37] Efimov IR, Cheng YN, Biermann M, Van Wagoner DR, Mazgalev TN, Tchou PJ. Transmembrane voltage changes produced by real and virtual electrodes during monophasic defibrillation shock delivered by an implantable electrode. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1997; 8: 1031–1045.
[38] Efimov IR, Cheng Y, Van Wagoner DR, Mazgalev T, Tchou PJ. Virtual electrode-induced phase singularity: a basic mechanism of defibrillation failure. Circ Res 1998; 82: 918–925.
[39] Efimov IR, Gray RA, Roth BJ. Virtual electrodes and deexcitation: new insights into fibrillation induction and defibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2000; 11: 339–353.
[40] Entcheva E, Eason J, Efimov IR, Cheng Y, Malkin R, Claydon F. Virtual electrode effects in transvenous defibrillation-modulation by structure and interface: evidence from bidomain simulations and optical mapping. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1998; 9: 949–961.
[41] Lindblom AE, Roth BJ, Trayanova NA. Role of virtual electrodes in arrhythmogenesis: pinwheel experiment revisited. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2000; 11: 274–285.
[42] Sobie EA, Susil RC, Tung L. A generalized activating function for predicting virtual electrodes in cardiac tissue. Biophys J 1997; 73: 1410–1423.
[43] Susil RC, Sobie EA, Tung L. Separation between virtual sources modifies the response of cardiac tissue to field stimulation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1999; 10: 715–727.
[44] White JB, Walcott GP, Pollard AE, Ideker RE. Myocardial discontinuities: a substrate for producing virtual electrodes that directly excite the myocardium by shocks. Circulation 1998; 97: 1738–1745.
[45] Fast VG, Rohr S, Gillis AM, Kleber AG. Activation of cardiac tissue by extracellular electrical shocks: formation of ‘secondary sources’ at intercellular clefts in monolayers of cultured myocytes. Circ Res 1998; 82: 375–385.
[46] Fast VG, Rohr S, Ideker RE. Non-linear changes of transmembrane potential caused by defibrillation shocks in strands of cultured myocytes. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2000; 278: H688–697.
[47] Tung L and Kleber AG. Virtual sources associated with linear and curved strands of cardiac cells. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2000; 279: H1579–1590.
[48] Cheek ER, Ideker RE, Fast VG. Non-linear changes of transmembrane potential during defibrillation shocks: role of Ca(2+) current. Circ Res 2000; 87: 453–459.
[49] Gillis AM, Fast VG, Rohr S, Kleber AG. Mechanism of ventricular defibrillation. The role of tissue geometry in the changes in transmembrane potential in patterned myocyte cultures. Circulation 2000; 101: 2438–2445.
[50] Cheng Y, Mowrey KA, Van Wagoner DR, Tchou PJ, Efimov IR. Virtual Electrode Induced Re-excitation: A Basic Mechanism of Defibrillation. Circ Res 1999; 85: 1056–1066.
[51] Al-Khadra AS and Efimov IR. Prevention of fibrillation by a preconditioning DC shock. European Heart Journal 2000; 21: 197.
[52] Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP. Numerical Recipes in C. 1992; 2 edn Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
[53] Wharton JM, Wolf PD, Smith WM, et al. Cardiac potential and potential gradient fields generated by single, combined, and sequential shocks during ventricular defibrillation. Circulation 1992; 85: 1510–1523.
[54] Davila HV, Salzberg BM, Cohen LB, Waggoner AS. A large change in axon fluorescence that provides a promising method for measuring membrane potential. Nat New Biol 1973; 241: 159–160.
[55] Grinvald A, Cohen LB, Lesher S, Boyle MB. Simultaneous optical monitoring of activity of many neurons in invertebrate ganglia using a 124-element photodiode array. J Neurophysiol 1981; 45: 829–840.
[56] Cleland BG. A conceptual basis for defibrillation waveforms. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1996; 19: 1186–1195.
[57] Swerdlow CD, Brewer JE, Kass RM, Kroll MW. Application of models of defibrillation to human defibrillation data: implications for optimizing implantable defibrillator capacitance. Circulation 1997; 96: 2813–2822.
[58] Al Khadra A, Nikolski V, Efimov IR. The role of electroporation in defibrillation. Circ Res 2000; 87: 797–804.
[59] Zhou X, Rollins DL, Smith WM, Ideker RE. Responses of the transmembrane potential of myocardial cells during a shock. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1995; 6: 252–263.
[60] Yamanouchi Y, Brewer JE, Mowrey KA, Donohoo AM, Wilkoff BL, Tchou PJ. Optimal small-capacitor biphasic waveform for external defibrillation: influence of phase-1 tilt and phase-2 voltage. Circulation 1998; 98: 2487–2493.
[61] Bardy GH, Poole JE, Kudenchuk PJ, et al. A prospective randomized comparison in humans of biphasic waveform 60- microF and 120-microF capacitance pulses using a unipolar defibrillation system. Circulation 1995; 91: 91–95.
[62] Cheng Y, Mowrey KA, Nikolski V, Tchou PJ, Efimov IR. Mechanisms of shock-induced arrhythmogenesis during acute global ischemia. Am J Physiol 2001; submitted.
[63] Hillsley RE, Walker RG, Swanson DK, et al. Is the second phase of a biphasic defibrillation waveform the defibrillating phase? Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1993; 16: 1401–1411.
[64] Raugalas E, Blazek Z, Vrana M. Efficacy of monophasic electrical impulses with steep leading and trailing edges in cardiac defibrillation. Cor Vasa 1977; 19: 376–384.
[65] Schuder JC, Rahmoeller GA, Stoeckle H. Transthoracic ventricular defibrillation with triangular and trapezoidal waveforms. Circ Res 1966; 19: 689–694.
[66] Veseliunas II and Smailis AI. [Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of different shapes of defibrillating pulses.]. Kardiologiia 1986; 26: 28–32.
[67] Gurvich NL and Yuniev GS. Restoration of regular rhythm in the mammalian fibrillating heart. Byulletin Eksper Biol & Med 1939; 8: 55–58.
[68] Gurvich NL, Tabak VY, Bogushevich MS, Vanin IV, Makarychev VA. Defibrillation of the heart with a diphasic impulse in experiment and in the clinic. J Cardiol 1971; 10: 104–107.
[69] Walcott GP, Melnick SB, Chapman FW, Jones JL, Smith WM, Ideker RE. Relative efficacy of monophasic and biphasic waveforms for transthoracic defibrillation after short and long durations of ventricular fibrillation. Circulation 1998; 98: 2210–2215.
[70] Cheng Y, Mowrey K, Efimov IR, Van Wagoner DR, Tchou PJ, Mazgalev TN. Effects of 2,3-butanedione monoxime on atrial-atrioventricular nodal conduction in isolated rabbit heart. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1997; 8: 790–802.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  F. Qu, L. Li, V. P. Nikolski, V. Sharma, and I. R. Efimov Mechanisms of superiority of ascending ramp waveforms: new insights into mechanisms of shock-induced vulnerability and defibrillation Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, August 1, 2005; 289(2): H569 - H577. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W. E. Irnich Kinetics of defibrillation shock-induced response: design implications for the optimal defibrillation waveform Europace, January 1, 2003; 5(3): 243 - 243. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. E. Ideker, V. G. Fast, and G. P. Walcott The relationship of defibrillation and stimulation: design implications for the optimum defibrillation waveform Europace, January 1, 2003; 5(3): 245 - 246. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. R. Efimov, K. A. Mowrey, Y. Cheng, and P. J. Tchou Reply Europace, January 1, 2003; 5(3): 243 - 244. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||