Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40496437›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in network physiology2025

Success rates of simulated multi-pulse defibrillation protocols are sensitive to application timing with individual, protocol-specific optimal timings.

Marcel Aron, Stefan Luther, Ulrich Parlitz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in network physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marcel AronBiomedical Physics Group, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Göttingen, Germany.
Stefan LutherBiomedical Physics Group, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Göttingen, Germany.
Ulrich ParlitzBiomedical Physics Group, Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Göttingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ventricular fibrillation is a lethal condition where the heartbeat becomes too disorganised to maintain proper circulation. It is treated with defibrillation, which applies an electric shock in an attempt to reset the heart rhythm. As the high energy of this shock risks long-term harm to the patient, means of reducing it without compromising treatment efficacy are of great interest. One approach to maintaining efficacy is to improve the success rate of such low-energy shocks (i.e., pulses) through the proper timing of their application as defibrillation protocols, which consist of one or more pulses with predetermined inter-pulse periods. In practice, however, the effects of application timing remain to be tested for any of the multi-pulse protocols proposed in literature. We use (de)fibrillation simulations to show that such timing matters: The success rate of single-pulse protocols can vary by as much as 80 percentage points depending on timing, and using more shocks in succession only lessens this sensitivity up to a point. We also present evidence that feedback-based defibrillation on a shock-by-shock basis may be the only practical means of using timing to increase treatment efficacy, as we also generally find any optimal application timings to be specific to each combination of protocol and fibrillation episode.

Indexed as

cardiac arrhythmiachaos controlexcitable medialow-energy defibrillationnetwork physiologyventricular fibrillation

Identifiers

PMID40496437
PMCPMC12148900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.