Low-tilt monophasic and biphasic waveforms compared with standard biphasic waveforms in the transvenous defibrillation of ventricular fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Commercially available implantable defibrillators utilize a high-tilt waveform. Studies in atrial fibrillation and transthoracic defibrillation of ventricular fibrillation (VF) have shown improved defibrillation efficacy using low-tilt (LT) waveforms. We investigated the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of a LT waveform in the transvenous defibrillation of VF and hypothesized that it would be more efficacious than standard tilted biphasic (STB) waveforms. METHODS AND RESULTS: The investigation was performed in four phases in a porcine model: an efficacy study of LT monophasic waveforms (n = 9), an efficacy study of LT biphasic waveforms (n = 9), a comparison study between the most successful LT waveforms and clinically available STB waveforms (n = 15), and a safety study (n = 9). A total of 1,056 shocks were delivered (phase 1: 288, phase 2: 288, phase 3: 480). The LT biphasic 8/4-ms waveform was significantly more likely to successfully defibrillate than the LT monophasic and STB waveforms with an odds ratio of 122.3 (95% confidence interval: 32.5, 460.2, P < 0.001). The calculated defibrillation threshold (E50) for the LT 8/4-ms waveform was 12.7 J compared to 43.5 J and 45.5 J for STB waveforms 6/6 ms and 8/4 ms, respectively, and 47.7 J for LT 12-ms waveform. The LT 8/4-ms waveform had no lasting detrimental effect on cardiac function, and any transient hemodynamical or biochemical changes observed were comparable to those observed with STB waveforms. CONCLUSION: LT waveforms are effective and appear safe in transvenous defibrillation in a porcine model of VF. The LT biphasic 8/4-ms waveform is more efficacious than conventional waveforms.

A support vector machine for predicting defibrillation outcomes from waveform metrics.

BACKGROUND: Algorithms to predict shock success based on VF waveform metrics could significantly enhance resuscitation by optimising the timing of defibrillation. OBJECTIVE: To investigate robust methods of predicting defibrillation success in VF cardiac arrest patients, by using a support vector machine (SVM) optimisation approach. METHODS: Frequency-domain (AMSA, dominant frequency and median frequency) and time-domain (slope and RMS amplitude) VF waveform metrics were calculated in a 4.1Y window prior to defibrillation. Conventional prediction test validity of each waveform parameter was conducted and used AUC>0.6 as the criterion for inclusion as a corroborative attribute processed by the SVM classification model. The latter used a Gaussian radial-basis-function (RBF) kernel and the error penalty factor C was fixed to 1. A two-fold cross-validation resampling technique was employed. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients had 115 defibrillation instances. AMSA, slope and RMS waveform metrics performed test validation with AUC>0.6 for predicting termination of VF and return-to-organised rhythm. Predictive accuracy of the optimised SVM design for termination of VF was 81.9% (± 1.24 SD); positive and negative predictivity were respectively 84.3% (± 1.98 SD) and 77.4% (± 1.24 SD); sensitivity and specificity were 87.6% (± 2.69 SD) and 71.6% (± 9.38 SD) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: AMSA, slope and RMS were the best VF waveform frequency-time parameters predictors of termination of VF according to test validity assessment. This a priori can be used for a simplified SVM optimised design that combines the predictive attributes of these VF waveform metrics for improved prediction accuracy and generalisation performance without requiring the definition of any threshold value on waveform metrics.

Synchronized defibrillation for ventricular fibrillation.

OBJECTIVE: Optimization of defibrillation success is important to improve efficacy and minimize post-shock sequelae. Previous work has suggested an improvement in shock success when an intracardiac shock is delivered synchronized to the upslope of a VF wave. We investigated the efficacy of transthoracic defibrillation success using a novel external biphasic defibrillator which delivers shocks synchronized to the upslope of the surface ECG. METHODS: A prospective, controlled, randomized study in a research institute laboratory of male and female pigs (54.2±1.8 kg). Ventricular fibrillation (VF) was induced in 10 anaesthetized and ventilated pigs. Shocks were delivered randomly from a biphasic defibrillator in synchronized or non-synchronized mode via self-adhesive electrode pads following 30 s of VF. Energy settings at 50, 70, 80, and 100J were randomly tested. VF amplitude, impedance, and shock outcome were recorded and analysed digitally. RESULTS: A total of 300 shocks were delivered. Synchronized shocks were delivered on the upslope of the VF wave in 99% of cases. There was no significant difference in shock success between shocks delivered in synchronized or non-synchronized modes (p=0.695). There was no significant difference in the amplitude of VF between successful and unsuccessful shocks (p=0.163). Furthermore, there was no association between shock success and transthoracic impedance. CONCLUSION: The novel defibrillator used in this study was able to consistently deliver shocks on the upslope portion of the VF wave but did not show an improvement in shock success.

Risk stratification of chest pain patients in the emergency department by a nurse utilizing a point of care protocol.

OBJECTIVE: Risk stratification of patients with ischaemic type chest pain assessed in the emergency department utilizing a point of care (POC) protocol. METHODS: Patient demographics, cardiac biomarkers, management and follow-up at 6 months were reviewed for patients seen over 20 months. RESULTS: Out of 546 patients, 351 (64%) were admitted. The diagnoses after admission were confirmed as acute myocardial infarction in 59 patients and unstable angina, (cTroponin T<0.09 ng/ml) in 92 patients. The c-statistic of the receiver operating curves for myocardial infarction (myocardial infarction, cTroponinT at 12 h >0.09 ng/ml) as determined by the POC assay was cTroponin I=0.884, CK-MB=0.883, myoglobin=0.845 and beta-type natriuretic peptide (BNP)=0.755. The c-statistic for the same sample assessed by the hospital laboratory was cTroponin T=0.893: for CK-MB within 12 h of admission it was 0.918; the 12 h cTroponin T was 0.982 and within 24 h of admission NT pro-BNP was 0.789. POC BNP in patients admitted was 68 ng/l (median) vs. 24 ng/l (median) for those not admitted, (P<0.001). POC BNP for patients admitted with unstable angina (12 h cTroponin T <0.09 ng/ml) was 47 ng/l (median, P<0.001). At 6 months, 14 patients had died; five during admission, two within 30 days and seven up to 6 months. During admission two died from heart failure, two with respiratory tract infection and one from carcinoma. Of those not admitted one had died from asbestosis. CONCLUSION: Risk stratification by a specialist nurse utilizing a POC protocol is an appropriate means of assessing patients with chest pain.

Variation in lung cancer survival rates between countries: do differences in data reporting contribute?

BACKGROUND: Mortality rates from lung cancer are known to vary considerably between countries. Differences in patients, disease, investigation and treatment are thought to account for some survival shortfalls but it is not known whether differences in collection or processing of data also contribute. METHODOLOGY: We searched recognised sources where information regarding mortality rates have been published for the United Kingdom, Europe and United States (US). Data regarding patient selection, demographics and mortality rates were extracted. RESULTS: Published international 5-year survival for patients with lung cancer varies from 5% to 16%. The survival figures quoted in the literature are based on data which varies widely in its collection and statistical analysis and this information is not always in the public domain. Data from the US suggests an overall 5-year survival rate of up to 16% although this figure covers only a quarter of the general population and excludes patients without histological confirmation. Many European countries report higher mortality rates although in most, data includes patients without proven histology. European datasets have variable population coverage. CONCLUSION: Selective data collection and variable population coverage may account for some of the differences in lung cancer survival between countries. More transparent description of data collection and analysis would be helpful but ideally a uniform method of reporting data is required in order to make valid comparisons in mortality rates.