This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map 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 Chen, P. S. Articles by Kass, R. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chen, P. S. Articles by Kass, R. M.

Circulation, Vol 88, 186-192, Copyright © 1993 by American Heart Association

ARTICLES

Relation between upper limit of vulnerability and defibrillation threshold in humans

PS Chen, GK Feld, JM Kriett, MM Mower, RY Tarazi, RP Fleck, CD Swerdlow, ES Gang and RM Kass
Department of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA 90048.

BACKGROUND. In the canine model, an upper limit of shock strength exists that can induce ventricular fibrillation during the vulnerable period of the cardiac cycle. This shock strength (the upper limit of vulnerability) closely correlates with the defibrillation threshold and supports the "upper limit of vulnerability" hypothesis of defibrillation. It is not known whether an upper limit of vulnerability exists in humans or whether this limit correlates with the defibrillation threshold. METHODS AND RESULTS. In 13 patients undergoing implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation, the shock strengths associated with a 50% probability of reaching the upper limit of vulnerability (ULV50) and a 50% probability of reaching the defibrillation threshold (DFT50) were determined by the up-down algorithm. The ULV50 was determined only for the mid-upslope of the positive T waves and for the mid-downslope of the negative T waves. No major complications occurred during surgery. An upper limit of vulnerability was demonstrated in each patient. The ULV50 was 300 +/- 138 V or 6.8 +/- 5.8 J, which was significantly lower than the DFT50 of 347 +/- 167 V (p = 0.038) or 9.1 +/- 7.3 J (p = 0.013). The correlation between the ULV50 and the DFT50 was significant (r = 0.90, p < 0.001 for voltage; r = 0.93, p < 0.001 for energy). CONCLUSIONS. An upper limit of vulnerability is present in humans. There is a significant correlation between the ULV50 and the DFT50, and the ULV50 is significantly lower than the DFT50.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Lemke, T. Lawo, M. Zarse, A. Lubinski, U. Kreutzer, J. Mueller, A. Schuchert, S. Mitzenheim, D. Danilovic, T. Deneke, et al. Patient-tailored implantable cardioverter defibrillator testing using the upper limit of vulnerability: the TULIP protocol Europace, August 1, 2008; 10(8): 907 - 913. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G.-S. Hwang, H. Hayashi, L. Tang, M. Ogawa, H. Hernandez, A. Y. Tan, H. Li, H. S. Karagueuzian, J. N. Weiss, S.-F. Lin, et al. Intracellular Calcium and Vulnerability to Fibrillation and Defibrillation in Langendorff-Perfused Rabbit Ventricles Circulation, December 12, 2006; 114(24): 2595 - 2603. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. W Bourn, M. M Maleckar, B. Rodriguez, and N. A Trayanova Mechanistic enquiry into the effect of increased pacing rate on the upper limit of vulnerability Phil Trans R Soc A, June 15, 2006; 364(1843): 1333 - 1348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Rodriguez, L. Li, J. C. Eason, I. R. Efimov, and N. A. Trayanova Differences Between Left and Right Ventricular Chamber Geometry Affect Cardiac Vulnerability to Electric Shocks Circ. Res., July 22, 2005; 97(2): 168 - 175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. C. Wang, M.-H. Lee, T. Ohara, Y. Okuyama, G. A. Fishbein, S.-F. Lin, H. S. Karagueuzian, and P.-S. Chen Optical Mapping of Ventricular Defibrillation in Isolated Swine Right Ventricles: Demonstration of a Postshock Isoelectric Window After Near-Threshold Defibrillation Shocks Circulation, July 10, 2001; 104(2): 227 - 233. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Chattipakorn, P. C. Fotuhi, X. Zheng, and R. E. Ideker Left Ventricular Apex Ablation Decreases the Upper Limit of Vulnerability Circulation, May 30, 2000; 101(21): 2458 - 2460. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. B. Moubarak, P. E. Karasik, R. D. Fletcher, and M. R. Franz High dispersion of ventricular repolarization after an implantable defibrillator shock predicts induction of ventricular fibrillation as well as unsuccessful defibrillation J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 1, 2000; 35(2): 422 - 427. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. F. Idriss, P. D. Wolf, W. M. Smith, and R. E. Ideker Effect of pacing site on ventricular fibrillation initiation by shocks during the vulnerable period Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, November 1, 1999; 277(5): H2065 - H2082. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Banville, R. A. Gray, R. E. Ideker, and W. M. Smith Shock-Induced Figure<$DOWNLINK>-of-Eight Reentry in the Isolated Rabbit Heart Circ. Res., October 15, 1999; 85(8): 742 - 752. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. N. Schauerte, K. Ziegert, M. Waldmann, F. A. Schondube, F. Birkenhauer, K. Mischke, M. Grossmann, P. Hanrath, and C. Stellbrink Effect of Biphasic Shock Duration on Defibrillation Threshold With Different Electrode Configurations and Phase 2 Capacitances : Prediction by Upper-Limit-of-Vulnerability Determination Circulation, March 23, 1999; 99(11): 1516 - 1522. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S Viskin, R Fish, A Roth, and Y Copperman Prevention of torsade de pointes in the congenital long QT syndrome: use of a pause prevention pacing algorithm Heart, April 1, 1998; 79(4): 417 - 419. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				J. Huang, B. H. KenKnight, G. P. Walcott, D. L. Rollins, W. M. Smith, and R. E. Ideker Effects of Transvenous Electrode Polarity and Waveform Duration on the Relationship Between Defibrillation Threshold and Upper Limit of Vulnerability Circulation, August 19, 1997; 96(4): 1351 - 1359. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				M. Gotoh, T. Uchida, W. J. Mandel, M. C. Fishbein, P.-S. Chen, and H. S. Karagueuzian Cellular Graded Responses and Ventricular Vulnerability to Reentry by a Premature Stimulus in Isolated Canine Ventricle Circulation, April 15, 1997; 95(8): 2141 - 2154. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				C. D. Swerdlow, C. T. Peter, R. M. Kass, E. S. Gang, W. J. Mandel, C. Hwang, D. J. Martin, and P.-S. Chen Programming of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators on the Basis of the Upper Limit of Vulnerability Circulation, March 18, 1997; 95(6): 1497 - 1504. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				S. Behrens, C. Li, P. Kirchhof, F. L. Fabritz, and M. R. Franz Reduced Arrhythmogenicity of Biphasic Versus Monophasic T-Wave Shocks: Implications for Defibrillation Efficacy Circulation, October 15, 1996; 94(8): 1974 - 1980. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				R. A. Malkin, S. F. Idriss, R. G. Walker, and R. E. Ideker Effect of Rapid Pacing and T-Wave Scanning on the Relation Between the Defibrillation and Upper-Limit-of-Vulnerability Dose-Response Curves Circulation, September 1, 1995; 92(5): 1291 - 1299. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				C. Bonometti, C. Hwang, D. Hough, J. J. Lee, M. C. Fishbein, H. S. Karagueuzian, and P.-S. Chen Interaction Between Strong Electrical Stimulation and Reentrant Wavefronts in Canine Ventricular Fibrillation Circ. Res., August 1, 1995; 77(2): 407 - 416. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				J. J. Souza, R. A. Malkin, and R. E. Ideker Comparison of Upper Limit of Vulnerability and Defibrillation Probability of Success Curves Using a Nonthoracotomy Lead System Circulation, February 15, 1995; 91(4): 1247 - 1252. [Abstract] [Full Text]