Objective To test different automated external defibrillators ( AED) waveforms in order to improve the CPR for the patients with out - of - hospital cardiac arrest. Methods In a randomized controlled trial, patients with out - of - hospital cardiac arrest requiring defibrillation were treated with 1 of 2 AED protocols. The experimental group was treated with biphasic defibrillator, the control group was treated with a unilateral waveform defibrillator. The rate of terminating arrhythmia, the rates of restoration of spontaneous circulation, survival rates to hospital were compared between low -energy biphasic defibrillation group and high - energy unilateral defibrillation. Results 830 patients were included in the final analysis. Experimental patients(n =417) had small energy 150 ~ 200 J while the controls(n =413) had 300 ~ 360 J. Different proportions survived to hospital admission (43.4% versus 27. 1% ,P <0.05) , survived to hospital discharge( 13. 4% versus 9. 8% ,P < 0. 05) , achieved return of spontaneous circulation before physician arrival ( 49. 4% versus 30. 9% , P < 0. 05 ) , and survived to 1 year( P = 0. 45 ) . Conclusion Biphasic wave defibrillator has better hemodynamic effect, which suggests that biphasic wave method results in more successful rate of resuscitation and survival to hospital admission.%目的 探讨抢救院外心脏骤停患者的最佳自动除颤仪(AED)治疗方案,旨在提高心脏按压时间和心肺复苏的效果.方法 通过前瞻性随机对照研究,对院外因室颤或者心脏停跳需要除颤的患者使用两种不同的除颤方法,试验组(n=417)采用双相波除颤仪,能量150～200 J;对照组(n=413)采用单相波除颤仪,能量300～360 J.主要观察低能量双相与高能量单相除颤两组患者心律失常成功终止率、自主循环恢复率、复苏后存活到院率.结果 共对符合研究要求的830例患者进行了分析研究.试验组患者的安全存活到院率、电击后自主循环恢复率和出院率明显高于对照组(P<0.05),治疗效果明显高于对照组.结论 双相电除颤不仅可更明显地减少电除颤阈值所需要的能量,减少对心肌的损害,而且通过对能量的优化,使除颤成功率、自主循环恢复率和复苏存活者的机体长期存活率均明显升高,具有重要的临床价值.
展开▼
