Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 207

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multicenter Comparison of Truncated Biphasic Shocks and Standard Damped Sine Wave Monophasic Shocks for Transthoracic Ventricular Defibrillation

Bardy, Gust H., Marchlinski, Francis E., Sharma, Arjun D., Worley, Seth J., Luceri, Richard M., Yee, Raymond, Halperin, Blair D., Fellows, Christopher L., Ahern, Thomas S., Chilson, Donald A., Packer, Douglas L., Wilber, David J., Mattioni, Thomas A., Reddy, Ramakota, Kronmal, Richard A., Lazzara, Ralph·1996·Circulation

Abstract

Background The most important factor for improving out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation survival rates is early defibrillation. This can be achieved if small, lightweight, inexpensive automatic external defibrillators are widely disseminated. Because automatic external defibrillator size and cost are directly affected by defibrillation waveform shape and because of the favorable experience with truncated biphasic waveforms in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, we compared the efficacy of a truncated biphasic waveform with that of a standard damped sine monophasic waveform for transthoracic defibrillation. Methods and Results The principal goal of this multicenter, prospective, randomized, blinded study was to compare the first-shock transthoracic defibrillation efficacy of a 130-J truncated biphasic waveform with that of a standard 200-J monophasic damped sine wave pulse using anterior thoracic pads in the course of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator testing. Pad-pad ECGs were also examined after transthoracic defibrillation. After the elimination of data for 24 patients who did not meet all protocol criteria, the results from 294 patients were analyzed. The 130-J truncated biphasic pulse and the 200-J damped sine wave monophasic pulse resulted in first-shock efficacy rates of 86% and 86%, respectively ( P =.97). ST-segment levels measured 10 seconds after the shock in 151 patients in sinus rhythm were −0.26±1.58 and −1.86±1.93 mm for the 130- and 200-J shocks, respectively ( P <.0001). Conclusions We found that 130-J biphasic truncated transthoracic shocks defibrillate as well as the 200-J monophasic damped sine wave shocks that are traditionally used in standard transthoracic defibrillators and result in fewer ECG abnormalities after the shock.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.94.10.2507

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 207

Metadata

Authors
Bardy, G. H., Marchlinski, F. E., Sharma, A. D., Worley, S. J., Luceri, R. M., Yee, R., Halperin, B. D., Fellows, C. L., Ahern, T. S., Chilson, D. A., Packer, D. L., Wilber, D. J., Mattioni, T. A., Reddy, R., Kronmal, R. A., & Lazzara, R.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1996-11-15
Volume
94
Issue
10
Pages
2507-2514
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2057616068
Cited by
207
References
1
FWCI
15.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Multicenter Comparison of Truncated Biphasic Shocks and Standard Damped Sine Wave Monophasic Shocks for Transthoracic Ventricular Defibrillation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.94.10.2507
The paper
Bardy, G. H., Marchlinski, F. E., Sharma, A. D., Worley, S. J., Luceri, R. M., Yee, R., Halperin, B. D., Fellows, C. L., Ahern, T. S., Chilson, D. A., Packer, D. L., Wilber, D. J., Mattioni, T. A., Reddy, R., Kronmal, R. A., & Lazzara, R. (1996). Multicenter Comparison of Truncated Biphasic Shocks and Standard Damped Sine Wave Monophasic Shocks for Transthoracic Ventricular Defibrillation. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.94.10.2507

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.