Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41940267›Full record

ArticleResuscitation plus2026

Effect of higher currents on defibrillation success in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a multicentre cohort analysis.

Alexander Michael Lechleuthner, Kathrin Leupolz, Fabian Ripke, Sarah Dopfer, Jan Stock, Christian Miller, Yacin Keller, Marco Strohm

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Alexander Michael LechleuthnerCity of Cologne Fire Department, Cologne, Germany.
Kathrin LeupolzGS Elektromedizinische Geräte G. Stemple GmbH, Kaufering, Germany.
Fabian RipkeGS Elektromedizinische Geräte G. Stemple GmbH, Kaufering, Germany.
Sarah DopferGS Elektromedizinische Geräte G. Stemple GmbH, Kaufering, Germany.
Jan StockL2R GmbH, Kürten-Herweg, Germany.
Christian MillerCity of Cologne Fire Department, Cologne, Germany.
Yacin KellerEmergency Department, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Marco StrohmCity of Cologne Fire Department, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Successful defibrillation requires sufficient electrical current to depolarize a critical mass of myocardial cells. The corpuls3 is available with the MAX option (MAX), which delivers its technically highest possible current for the actual impedance, instead of a fixed energy. This retrospective analysis compared shock success with MAX versus the standard 200 J setting. Methods: We retrospectively analysed ECG records from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) in four German regions (May 2022-June 2024) to compare termination of fibrillation (TOF) and return of organised rhythm (ROOR) after shocks with MAX or 200 J. Results: A total of 1457 shocks with MAX and 2348 shocks with 200 J were included. First-shock success did not differ significantly between MAX and 200 J (TOF: 81 % vs. 76 %, Conclusion: MAX does not improve first-shock success compared to 200 J, but overall TOF and ROOR rates are significantly higher with MAX.

Indexed as

EfficacyEnergyFibrillationImpedanceShock successWaveform

Identifiers

PMID41940267
PMCPMC13044361

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.