ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Scientific Priorities Related to the Use of Double Sequential External Defibrillation in Patients With Refractory Cardiac Arrest: Report From a Multistakeholder Thinktank.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Successful prehospital double sequential external defibrillation in a 15-year-old with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Wolf Creek XVIII Part 3: Innovations in Defibrillation Science.Resuscitation plus · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ventricular fibrillation (VF) is common among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Cardiac arrest with VF has a more favorable prognosis than those with other rhythms, but about 25% of patients with VF are still fibrillating after 3 attempts at defibrillation. Use of 2 defibrillators close together in time, "double sequential external defibrillation" (DSED), has been proposed to treat patients who remain in VF. The DOSE VF (Defibrillation Strategies for Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation) trial enrolled patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with refractory VF to compare DSED versus vector change defibrillation versus standard defibrillation. This trial reported a significant increase in survival with DSED and vector change. DSED was also associated with a significant increase in favorable neurologic outcome. No manual or automated defibrillator is approved for use for DSED. Clinicians can choose to use defibrillators to apply DSED off label at their discretion. But in the absence of recommendations from evidence-based guidelines, Food and Drug Administration, manufacturers, and clinicians face uncertainty about the effectiveness of DSED, its potential disruption of cardiopulmonary resuscitation interruption or use of other effective therapies, as well as potential adverse effects on patients to whom it is applied, and damage to the defibrillator. A collaborative, precompetitive thinktank including academic clinicians and researchers, regulators, and device manufacturers participated in a daylong meeting coconvened by the American Heart Association, the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium and the Food and Drug Administration. We summarize the discussion that sought to advance the understanding of the benefits and risks associated with DSED in patients who remain in VF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.