This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ito, M. Articles by Zipes, D. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ito, M. Articles by Zipes, D. P.

Circulation, Vol 88, 2661-2673, Copyright © 1993 by American Heart Association

ARTICLES

Defibrillating shocks delivered to the heart impair efferent sympathetic responsiveness

M Ito, HP Pride and DP Zipes
Krannert Institute of Cardiology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis 46202.

BACKGROUND. Functional studies indicate that sympathetic efferents are located in the superficial subepicardium and vagal efferents are located in the subendocardium. It is possible that electrical shocks applied directly to the heart might affect the function of these autonomic nerves. METHODS AND RESULTS. Low- (< or = 1 J), medium- (6 to 16 J), or high- (30 to 35 J) energy truncated monophasic exponential shocks, synchronized to the R wave during sinus rhythm, were delivered over implantable patches sutured inside the pericardium in anesthetized open-chest dogs. Shortening of ventricular effective refractory period (ERP), produced by bilateral ansae subclaviae stimulation (SS), was measured before and after shock delivery. High-energy shocks shifted the SS frequency-ERP response curves downward and to the right (P < .001) for sites beneath and apical to the patches; ERP shortening at basal sites remained unchanged. Such sympathetic attenuation occurred with shocks > 10 J but not with shocks < or = 10 J, was noted 15 minutes after the shock, and showed incomplete return to control values at 3 hours. Neither low- nor high-energy shocks affected norepinephrine dose-ERP response curves, indicating normal myocardial responsiveness. Low- and high-energy shocks did not attenuate bilateral cervical vagal stimulation-induced ERP prolongation. High-energy shocks delivered over patches sutured to the outside of the pericardium showed no effects on sympathetic response, suggesting a protective effect of the pericardium against shock-induced sympathetic attenuation. CONCLUSIONS. DC shocks > 10 J delivered directly to the epicardium attenuated efferent sympathetic neural function. Such changes may affect electrophysiological, as well as hemodynamic, responses to sympathetic neural stimulation after cardioversion-defibrillation.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Cinca and A. Rodriguez-Sinovas Cardiovascular reflex responses induced by epicardial chemoreceptor stimulation Cardiovasc Res, January 1, 2000; 45(1): 163 - 171. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F Bode, U Wiegand, W Raasch, G Richardt, and J Potratz Differential effects of defibrillation on systemic and cardiac sympathetic activity Heart, June 1, 1998; 79(6): 560 - 567. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				A. Elvan and D. P. Zipes Right Ventricular Infarction Causes Heterogeneous Autonomic Denervation of the Viable Peri-infarct Area Circulation, February 10, 1998; 97(5): 484 - 492. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Satoh and D. P. Zipes Rapid Rates During Bradycardia Prolong Ventricular Refractoriness and Facilitate Ventricular Tachycardia Induction With Cesium in Dogs Circulation, July 15, 1996; 94(2): 217 - 227. [Abstract] [Full Text]