Talk:Commotio cordis/Archive 1

Untitled[edit]

One of the few wiki pages I have ever seen that appears to be properly referenced (ie in proper academic style). Good job! Badgerpatrol 00:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the main contributor, I thank you. I am a trained scientist. --R.Sabbatini 17:38, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Energy levels[edit]

Hi

great page; I was impressed by the level of reference. One thing I did notice is that you refer to high-energy impacts throughout. I'm not sure if you agree, but I think it's important to note the difference between commotio and contusio cordis, which happens at higher energy levels. Garan et al (2005) described commotio cordis in pigs hit with baseballs travelling around 40mph, which equates to about 20J on the chest - depending on your frame of reference, this may not be high energy, especially as not all of it will reach the heart. Also, recent work by Cooper et al (2006) shows that, in a isolated guinea pig heart, impacts of 2-2.5J are required to avoid release of creatine kinase (a marker for cell damage). Perhaps you could take this into consideration if you are thinking about a re-write.

Thanks

Iain Joncomelately 00:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Criminal Consequences?[edit]

Just read the Maron / Mitten article and don't see slow response time at athletic events mentioned as receiving criminal prosecution. Was there another source or am I missing something?

216.160.159.169 (talk) 18:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kids' skeltons?[edit]

I have altered the sentence which claims kids are more at risk because of their "fragile thoracic skeletons". I can find no evidence that it is the fragility of their bones that increases their risk, and rather think fragile bones would predispose against commotio cordis as it would make physical damage more likely.

I also wonder if it is more likely that kids are predominantly affected more because of the situations they put themselves in, rather than any mechanical properties?

Iain Joncomelately _{Come over} 02:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that fragile is the wrong word to use, especially since kids skeletons are not more fragile. What they are is less calcified, and thus would put up less resistance to a blow, transferring more of the impact energy on to the heart. I'm not actually sure the sources say that though. --76.193.18.74 (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Age as a Factor[edit]

are there statistics on the incidence of the disorder as a function of age? i.e., are high school athletes more at risk than college? elementary school?Toyokuni3 (talk) 17:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Fulminant Death'[edit]

under wikipedia's definition of fulminant , isn't its use here redundant?Toyokuni3 (talk) 17:04, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Myocardial Contusion[edit]

Great page, but I am unsure why "Myocardial Contusion" redirects here, as it should have a page of its own since as the article states, it is a separate entity. Is it just that no-one has written a page for "Myocardial Contusion" yet? 26 February 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.164.136 (talk) 02:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1000 milliseconds[edit]

"the total cardiac cycle has a duration of 1000 milliseconds (for a base cardiac frequency of 60 beats per minute)". Really? 1000 milliseconds. Could that be, wait for it, one second. But then, because we've not been condescending to the reader enough we clarify that one minute does in fact divide by sixty to produce one.

Comedy. Actual comedy. Gytrash (talk) 02:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is common practice to give all similar measurements in the same units. Since milliseconds is the appropriate units for the period of vulnerability (or indeed, discussing any particular event duration for heart rhythm), then its appropriate to continue using milliseconds for any other measurement related to that, such as the duration of one cycle. (The sixty seconds to a minute thing I didn't notice in a read through, but that does sound overly pedantic if it's still there). --76.193.18.74 (talk) 14:57, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Commotio cordis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:49, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Commotio cordis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090124132653/http://erc.edu/index.php/ilcor/en to http://www.erc.edu/index.php/ilcor/en/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. InternetArchiveBot]] (Report bug) 03:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.