(Circulation. 1995;92:1644-1650.)
© 1995 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
Differential Effects of Lidocaine on Defibrillation Threshold With Monophasic Versus Biphasic Shock Waveforms
From the University of Georgia College of Pharmacy and Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine (M.R.U.) (Augusta); and the University of Cincinnati Medical Center Colleges of Pharmacy and Medicine (M.R.U., M.S., T.F., M.G., M.L.M.), Cincinnati, Ohio.
Correspondence to Dr Michael Ujhelyi, Medical College of Georgia, Rm FI-1087, Augusta, GA 30912-2390.
Background Defibrillation waveforms and antiarrhythmic drugs have disparate effects on myocardial excitability and refractoriness, making it likely that antiarrhythmic drugs will interact with one waveform differently than with another. The aim of the present study was to determine if the increase in defibrillation threshold (DFT) induced by lidocaine is similar for electrical shocks with monophasic and biphasic waveforms.
Methods and Results Twenty-six pentobarbital-anesthetized farm-raised pigs were instrumented with pacing catheters and epicardial defibrillation electrodes. Each pig was assigned to one of four groups: (1) monophasic shock waveform and placebo (5% dextrose in water [D5W]) (n=7), (2) monophasic shock waveform and lidocaine (n=7), (3) biphasic shock waveform and placebo (D5W) (n=5), or (4) biphasic shock waveform and lidocaine (n=7). DFT was measured at baseline and subsequently during treatment (D5W or lidocaine). In the monophasic waveform groups, DFT increased from baseline in response to lidocaine by 92% (P<.0001), whereas DFT values in response to D5W did not change. In the biphasic waveform groups, DFT values did not change from baseline in response to lidocaine (P=NS), whereas DFT values from baseline in response to D5W significantly decreased by 29% (P=.04). In the monophasic waveform groups, the change in DFT from baseline in response to lidocaine was significantly different than the change from baseline in response to D5W (92±29% versus -0.5±29%, respectively) (P<.0002). In the biphasic waveform groups, however, the change in DFT from baseline in response to lidocaine was similar to the change from baseline in response to D5W (-5.66±15% versus -29±17%, respectively) (P=.48). Furthermore, the change in DFT from baseline in response to lidocaine differed significantly between monophasic and biphasic waveform groups (92±29% versus -5.66±15%) (P<.0002), whereas the change from baseline in response to D5W did not differ between monophasic and biphasic waveforms (-0.5±29% versus -29±17%) (P=.34).
Conclusions Compared with placebo groups, DFT values increased during lidocaine treatment to a much greater degree in the monophasic waveform group than in the biphasic waveform group receiving lidocaine. These data support our hypothesis that antiarrhythmic drugs can affect the defibrillation efficacy of monophasic waveforms differently than that of biphasic waveforms.
Key Words: defibrillation • waves • lidocaine • antiarrhythmia agents
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  C. Materazzo, P. Piotti, C. Mantovani, R. Miceli, and F. Villani Atrial fibrillation after non-cardiac surgery: P-wave characteristics and Holter monitoring in risk assessment Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., May 1, 2007; 31(5): 812 - 816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. J. Sims, K. L. Schoff, J. M. Loeb, and N. A. Wiegert Regional gap junction inhibition increases defibrillation thresholds Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, June 5, 2003; 285(1): H10 - H16. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. R. Ujhelyi, J. J. Sims, and A. W. Miller Induction of Electrical Heterogeneity Impairs Ventricular Defibrillation : An Effect Specific to Regional Conduction Velocity Slowing Circulation, December 21, 1999; 100(25): 2534 - 2540. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D A Chamberlain Antiarrhythmic drugs in resuscitation Heart, October 1, 1998; 80(4): 408 - 411. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. J. Sims, A. W. Miller, and M. R. Ujhelyi Disparate effects of biphasic and monophasic shocks on postshock refractory period dispersion Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, June 1, 1998; 274(6): H1943 - H1949. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. O. Cummins, M. F. Hazinski, R. E. Kerber, P. Kudenchuk, L. Becker, G. Nichol, B. Malanga, T. P. Aufderheide, E. M. Stapleton, K. Kern, et al. Low-Energy Biphasic Waveform Defibrillation: Evidence-Based Review Applied to Emergency Cardiovascular Care Guidelines : A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association Committee on Emergency Cardiovascular Care and the Subcommittees on Basic Life Support, Advanced Cardiac Life Support, and Pediatric Resuscitation Circulation, April 28, 1998; 97(16): 1654 - 1667. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. R. Ujhelyi, J. J. Sims, and A. W. Miller High-dose lidocaine does not affect defibrillation efficacy: implications for defibrillation mechanisms Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, April 1, 1998; 274(4): H1113 - H1120. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. P. Winecoff, J. J. Sims, M. L. Markel, and M. R. Ujhelyi Pinacidil's Effects on Defibrillation Outcomes: Role of Increased Potassium Conductance Via the KATP Channel Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, January 1, 1997; 2(3): 171 - 180. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. H. Bardy, F. E. Marchlinski, A. D. Sharma, S. J. Worley, R. M. Luceri, R. Yee, B. D. Halperin, C. L. Fellows, T. S. Ahern, D. A. Chilson, et al. Multicenter Comparison of Truncated Biphasic Shocks and Standard Damped Sine Wave Monophasic Shocks for Transthoracic Ventricular Defibrillation Circulation, November 15, 1996; 94(10): 2507 - 2514. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|