Defibrillation efficacy. Comparison of defibrillation threshold versus dose-response curve determination.

Abstract

When an automatic defibrillator is implanted, it is essential to determine the efficacy of the defibrillating system accurately, while balancing the need to keep the number of fibrillation episodes to a minimum. Two methods have evolved to assess defibrillation efficacy: 1) the "defibrillation threshold," which requires few ventricular fibrillation episodes, and 2) the "dose-response curve," which requires many ventricular fibrillation episodes and relates percent success to energy. The purpose of this study was to compare these two methods directly. Twenty open-chest anesthetized pigs had triplicate defibrillation threshold determinations. To produce a dose-response curve, six shocks then were delivered at 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.25, 1.5, and 2.0 times the mean defibrillation threshold, in a balanced randomized order, during separate episodes of ventricular fibrillation. The data were fitted by logistic regression, conversions of the logistic regression, and a saturable exponential and nonsaturable growth exponential. A comparison was made of the mean defibrillation threshold and the 50% point on the dose-response curve (ED50) for each model, for each animal. In addition, the reliability of each measure was assessed by comparing the coefficients of variation. There was no statistical difference between the group defibrillation threshold (6.6 +/- 0.5 J) and group ED50 values (ED50 range of the models, 5.7 +/- 1.9 to 7.0 +/- 0.9 J). However, the variability about the defibrillation threshold was less than that of the ED50 values for all mathematical models except the true logistic equation, which was virtually the same.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)