Effect of capacitor size and pathway resistance on defibrillation threshold for implantable defibrillators.
- 1 October 1994
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 90 (4) , 1840-1846
- https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.90.4.1840
Abstract
BACKGROUND The time constant of truncated exponential pulses used with implantable defibrillators is determined by the output capacitor size and defibrillation pathway resistance. The optimal capacitor size is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS This study compared defibrillation threshold (DFT) for standard 120-microF capacitors (DFT120) and smaller 60-microF capacitors (DFT60) at implantation of cardioverter-defibrillators in 67 patients using epicardial electrodes (15 patients) or one of four transvenous electrode configurations (52 patients). Paired comparisons of DFT60 and DFT120 were made for 44 defibrillation pathways using monophasic pulses and for 53 pathways using biphasic pulses. Truncated exponential pulses with 65% tilt were used. Pooled data from all electrode configurations showed a significant inverse correlation between pathway resistance and the ratio of stored energy DFT60 to DFT120 (monophasic pulses: r = .75, P = .0001; biphasic pulses: r = .68, P = .0001). Data from all electrode configurations formed a continuum with 120-microF capacitors superior for low-resistance pathways and 60-microF capacitors superior for high-resistance pathways. For pathways with resistance < or = 40 omega, the modest advantage of 120-microF capacitors applied primarily to pathways with low DFTs: 8.2 +/- 6.1 versus 9.6 +/- 5.4 J (P = .001) for monophasic pulses and 4.1 +/- 2.8 versus 5.1 +/- 3.1 J (P < .02) for biphasic pulses. The greater advantage of 60-microF capacitors for pathways with resistance > or = 61 omega applied to pathways with higher DFTs: 12.4 +/- 4.3 versus 23.1 +/- 6.4 J (P = .0001) for monophasic pulses and 8.5 +/- 4.9 versus 12.5 +/- 6.4 J (P = .0001) for biphasic pulses. For pathways using monophasic 120-microF pulses versus 95% for 60-microF pulses. Similarly, the DFT was < or = 10 J for 48% of pathways using biphasic 120-microF capacitors versus 83% for 60-microF pulses. CONCLUSIONS In comparison with conventional 120-microF capacitors, 60-microF capacitors had clinically insignificant higher DFTs for low-resistance pathways and clinically important lower DFTs for high-resistance pathways. Optimal capacitance is inversely related to pathway resistance for clinical defibrillation pathways and waveforms.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effects of voltage and respiration on impedance in nonthoracotomy defibrillation pathwaysThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1994
- Utility of Low Energy Test Shocks for Estimation of Cardiac and Electrode Impedance with Implantable DefibrillatorsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1990
- Implantable cardioverters and defibrillatorsCurrent Problems in Cardiology, 1989
- A prospective randomized evaluation of biphasic versus monophasic waveform pulses on defibrillation efficacy in humansJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1989
- Prospective comparison of sequential pulse and single pulse defibrillation with use of two different clinically available systemsJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1989
- Strength‐Duration Curves of Fixed Pulse Width Variable Tilt Truncated Exponential Waveforms for Nonthoracomy Internal Defibrillation in DogsPacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1988
- Double and triple sequential shocks reduce ventricular defibrillation threshold in dogs with and without myocardial infarctionJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1986
- Bipolar catheter defibrillation in dogs using trapezoidal waveforms of various tiltsJournal of Electrocardiology, 1980