181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9309741)
1. Timing of the upper limit of vulnerability is different for monophasic and biphasic shocks: implications for the determination of the defibrillation threshold.
Behrens S; Li C; Franz MR
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 1997 Sep; 20(9 Pt 1):2179-87. PubMed ID: 9309741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Shock-induced dispersion of ventricular repolarization: implications for the induction of ventricular fibrillation and the upper limit of vulnerability.
Behrens S; Li C; Fabritz CL; Kirchhof PF; Franz MR
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 1997 Sep; 8(9):998-1008. PubMed ID: 9300297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Myocardial vulnerability to T wave shocks: relation to shock strength, shock coupling interval, and dispersion of ventricular repolarization.
Fabritz CL; Kirchhof PF; Behrens S; Zabel M; Franz MR
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 1996 Mar; 7(3):231-42. PubMed ID: 8867297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Lidocaine increases the proarrhythmic effects of monophasic but not biphasic shocks.
Sims JJ; Miller AW; Ujhelyi MR
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 2001 Dec; 12(12):1363-8. PubMed ID: 11797993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reduced arrhythmogenicity of biphasic versus monophasic T-wave shocks. Implications for defibrillation efficacy.
Behrens S; Li C; Kirchhof P; Fabritz FL; Franz MR
Circulation; 1996 Oct; 94(8):1974-80. PubMed ID: 8873676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Electrophysiological effects of monophasic and biphasic stimuli in normal and infarcted dogs.
Wharton JM; Richard VJ; Murry CE; Dixon EG; Reimer KA; Meador J; Smith WM; Ideker RE
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 1990 Sep; 13(9):1158-72. PubMed ID: 1700392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effect of shock waveform on relationship between upper limit of vulnerability and defibrillation threshold.
Swerdlow CD; Kass RM; O'Connor ME; Chen PS
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 1998 Apr; 9(4):339-49. PubMed ID: 9581950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effect of rapid pacing and T-wave scanning on the relation between the defibrillation and upper-limit-of-vulnerability dose-response curves.
Malkin RA; Idriss SF; Walker RG; Ideker RE
Circulation; 1995 Sep; 92(5):1291-9. PubMed ID: 7648678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The zone of vulnerability to T wave shocks in humans.
Swerdlow CD; Martin DJ; Kass RM; Davie S; Mandel WJ; Gang ES; Chen PS
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 1997 Feb; 8(2):145-54. PubMed ID: 9147699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Relation of atrial refractoriness to upper and lower limits of vulnerability for atrial fibrillation/flutter following implantable ventricular defibrillator shocks.
Katz A; Sweeney RJ; Gill RM; Reid PR; Prystowsky EN
Circulation; 1999 Sep; 100(10):1125-30. PubMed ID: 10477539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Correlation of acute and chronic defibrillation threshold with upper limit of vulnerability determined in normal sinus rhythm.
Birgersdotter-Green U; Undesser K; Fujimura O; Feld GK; Kass RM; Mandel WJ; Peter CT; Chen PS
J Interv Card Electrophysiol; 1999 Jul; 3(2):155-61. PubMed ID: 10387143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of upper limit of vulnerability and defibrillation probability of success curves using a nonthoracotomy lead system.
Souza JJ; Malkin RA; Ideker RE
Circulation; 1995 Feb; 91(4):1247-52. PubMed ID: 7850965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of transvenous electrode polarity and waveform duration on the relationship between defibrillation threshold and upper limit of vulnerability.
Huang J; KenKnight BH; Walcott GP; Rollins DL; Smith WM; Ideker RE
Circulation; 1997 Aug; 96(4):1351-9. PubMed ID: 9286969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effects of long-term amiodarone treatment on ventricular-fibrillation vulnerability and defibrillation efficacy in response to monophasic and biphasic shocks.
Behrens S; Li C; Franz MR
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol; 1997 Oct; 30(4):412-8. PubMed ID: 9335398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effects of the pacing site, procainamide, and lead configuration on the relationship between the upper limit of vulnerability and the defibrillation threshold.
Fan W; Gotoh M; Chen PS
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 1995 Jun; 18(6):1279-84. PubMed ID: 7659583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Assessment of adequate safety margin using single coupling interval-upper limit of vulnerability test.
Patel MB; Pandya K; Thakur RK
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 2014 Jan; 37(1):95-103. PubMed ID: 24033830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Determination of the upper limit of vulnerability using implantable cardioverter-defibrillator electrograms.
Swerdlow C; Shivkumar K; Zhang J
Circulation; 2003 Jun; 107(24):3028-33. PubMed ID: 12810611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Detection of the defibrillation threshold using the upper limit of vulnerability following defibrillator implantation.
Kirilmaz A; Dokumaci B; Uzun M; Kilicaslan F; Dinckal MH; Yucel O; Karaca M
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 2005 Jun; 28(6):498-505. PubMed ID: 15955181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Optimal strength and number of shocks at upper limit of vulnerability testing required to predict high defibrillation threshold without inducing ventricular fibrillation.
Takami K; Yoshida A; Fukuzawa K; Takei A; Kiuchi K; Kanda G; Kumagai H; Takami M; Torii-Tanaka S; Itoh M; Imamura K; Fujiwara R; Suzuki A; Nakanishi T; Yamashita S; Matsumoto A; Hirata K
Circ J; 2013; 77(10):2490-6. PubMed ID: 23877733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Early postoperative rise in defibrillation threshold in patients with nonthoracotomy defibrillation lead systems: attenuation with biphasic shock waveforms.
Schwartzman D; Callans DJ; Gottlieb CD; Heo J; Marchlinski FE
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 1996 Jun; 7(6):483-93. PubMed ID: 8743754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
