[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
November 1, 1976


Author Affiliations

Purdue University West Lafayette, Ind

JAMA. 1976;236(18):2053. doi:10.1001/jama.1976.03270190015014

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor. —  We do not agree with the opinion that high-energy defibrillators or the Pantridge defibrillator are particularly expensive, since both types of units are now available at reasonable costs. Also, it should be made clear that the Pantridge defibrillator is not limited to a lowenergy capability. It delivers 357 watt-seconds (W-sec) into a 50-Ω load (Health Devices, July 1976, p 199). The difference in high-energy and lowenergy techniques is that we advocate adequate energy to defibrillate on the first attempt, whereas Pantridge advocates repeated low-energy defibrillation attempts with cardiopulmonary resuscitation between shocks.We would also like to point out that in our article (Journal of Clinical Investigation 53:310, 1974) we do not make any recommendations about use of dc capacitor discharge energy. We refer in that article to damped sinusoidal waveforms, which are vastly different than the waveform used by Kouwenhoven (Journal of Applied Physiology 7:253, 1954).