Comparison of rectilinear biphasic waveform energy versus truncated exponential biphasic waveform energy for transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

Maureen L. Kim, Soo G. Kim, David S. Park, Jay N. Gross, Kevin J. Ferrick, Eugen C. Palma, John Devens Fisher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Success rates of cardioversion with a defibrillator using the truncated exponential biphasic waveform (with a maximum energy of 360 J) and a defibrillator using the rectilinear biphasic waveform (with a maximum energy of 200 J) were randomly compared in 145 patients. Success rates at 50, 100, 150, and 200 J were not significantly different, but 2 patients who did not achieve cardioversion after a 200-J maximum energy shock by the rectilinear device underwent successful cardioversion with a 360-J shock by the truncated exponential device after crossover.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1438-1440
Number of pages3
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume94
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2004

Fingerprint

Electric Countershock
Atrial Fibrillation
Defibrillators
Shock
Equipment and Supplies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@article{809f268fde4e4374b120f1cf3a14dda3,
title = "Comparison of rectilinear biphasic waveform energy versus truncated exponential biphasic waveform energy for transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation",
abstract = "Success rates of cardioversion with a defibrillator using the truncated exponential biphasic waveform (with a maximum energy of 360 J) and a defibrillator using the rectilinear biphasic waveform (with a maximum energy of 200 J) were randomly compared in 145 patients. Success rates at 50, 100, 150, and 200 J were not significantly different, but 2 patients who did not achieve cardioversion after a 200-J maximum energy shock by the rectilinear device underwent successful cardioversion with a 360-J shock by the truncated exponential device after crossover.",
author = "Kim, {Maureen L.} and Kim, {Soo G.} and Park, {David S.} and Gross, {Jay N.} and Ferrick, {Kevin J.} and Palma, {Eugen C.} and Fisher, {John Devens}",
year = "2004",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.07.149",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "94",
pages = "1438--1440",
journal = "American Journal of Cardiology",
issn = "0002-9149",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of rectilinear biphasic waveform energy versus truncated exponential biphasic waveform energy for transthoracic cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

AU - Kim, Maureen L.

AU - Kim, Soo G.

AU - Park, David S.

AU - Gross, Jay N.

AU - Ferrick, Kevin J.

AU - Palma, Eugen C.

AU - Fisher, John Devens

PY - 2004/12/1

Y1 - 2004/12/1

N2 - Success rates of cardioversion with a defibrillator using the truncated exponential biphasic waveform (with a maximum energy of 360 J) and a defibrillator using the rectilinear biphasic waveform (with a maximum energy of 200 J) were randomly compared in 145 patients. Success rates at 50, 100, 150, and 200 J were not significantly different, but 2 patients who did not achieve cardioversion after a 200-J maximum energy shock by the rectilinear device underwent successful cardioversion with a 360-J shock by the truncated exponential device after crossover.

AB - Success rates of cardioversion with a defibrillator using the truncated exponential biphasic waveform (with a maximum energy of 360 J) and a defibrillator using the rectilinear biphasic waveform (with a maximum energy of 200 J) were randomly compared in 145 patients. Success rates at 50, 100, 150, and 200 J were not significantly different, but 2 patients who did not achieve cardioversion after a 200-J maximum energy shock by the rectilinear device underwent successful cardioversion with a 360-J shock by the truncated exponential device after crossover.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=9344261778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=9344261778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.07.149

DO - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.07.149

M3 - Article

C2 - 15566922

AN - SCOPUS:9344261778

VL - 94

SP - 1438

EP - 1440

JO - American Journal of Cardiology

JF - American Journal of Cardiology

SN - 0002-9149

IS - 11

ER -