8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Single Ventilation during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Results in Better Neurological Outcomes in a Porcine Model of Cardiac Arrest

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Recent basic life support (BLS) guidelines recommend a 30:2 compression-to-ventilation ratio (CV2) or chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CC); however, there are inevitable risks of interruption of high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in CV2 and hypoxemia in CC. In this study, we compared the short-term outcomes among CC, CV2, and 30:1 CV ratio (CV1).

          Materials and Methods

          In total, 42 pigs were randomly assigned to CC, CV1, or CV2 groups. After induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF), we observed pigs for 2 minutes without any intervention. Thereafter, BLS was started according to the assigned method and performed for 8 minutes. Defibrillation was performed after BLS and repeated every 2 minutes, followed by rhythm analysis. Advanced cardiac life support, including continuous chest compression with ventilation every 6 seconds and intravenous injection of 1 mg epinephrine every 4 minutes, was performed until the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or 22 minutes after VF induction. Hemodynamic parameters and arterial blood gas profiles were compared among groups. ROSC, 24-hour survival, and neurologic outcomes were evaluated at 24 hours.

          Results

          The hemodynamic parameters during CPR did not differ among the study groups. Partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood and arterial oxygen saturation were lowest in the CC group, compared to those in the other groups, during the BLS period ( p=0.002 and p<0.001, respectively). The CV1 groups showed a significantly higher rate of favorable neurologic outcome (swine CPC 1 or 2) than the other groups ( p=0.044).

          Conclusion

          CPR with CV1 could promote better neurologic outcome than CV2 and CC.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Hyperventilation-induced hypotension during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

          A clinical observational study revealed that rescuers consistently hyperventilated patients during out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The objective of this study was to quantify the degree of excessive ventilation in humans and determine if comparable excessive ventilation rates during CPR in animals significantly decrease coronary perfusion pressure and survival. In humans, ventilation rate and duration during CPR was electronically recorded by professional rescuers. In 13 consecutive adults (average age, 63+/-5.8 years) receiving CPR (7 men), average ventilation rate was 30+/-3.2 per minute (range, 15 to 49). Average duration per breath was 1.0+/-0.07 per second. No patient survived. Hemodynamics were studied in 9 pigs in cardiac arrest ventilated in random order with 12, 20, or 30 breaths per minute. Survival rates were then studied in 3 groups of 7 pigs in cardiac arrest that were ventilated at 12 breaths per minute (100% O2), 30 breaths per minute (100% O2), or 30 breaths per minute (5% CO2/95% O2). In animals treated with 12, 20, and 30 breaths per minute, the mean intrathoracic pressure (mm Hg/min) and coronary perfusion pressure (mm Hg) were 7.1+/-0.7, 11.6+/-0.7, 17.5+/-1.0 (P<0.0001), and 23.4+/-1.0, 19.5+/-1.8, and 16.9+/-1.8 (P=0.03), respectively. Survival rates were 6/7, 1/7, and 1/7 with 12, 30, and 30+ CO2 breaths per minute, respectively (P=0.006). Professional rescuers were observed to excessively ventilate patients during out-of-hospital CPR. Subsequent animal studies demonstrated that similar excessive ventilation rates resulted in significantly increased intrathoracic pressure and markedly decreased coronary perfusion pressures and survival rates.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Part 3: Adult Basic Life Support and Automated External Defibrillation: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

            This review comprises the most extensive literature search and evidence evaluation to date on the most important international BLS interventions, diagnostics, and prognostic factors for cardiac arrest victims. It reemphasizes that the critical lifesaving steps of BLS are (1) prevention, (2) immediate recognition and activation of the emergency response system, (3) early high-quality CPR, and (4) rapid defibrillation for shockable rhythms. Highlights in prevention indicate the rational and judicious deployment of search-and-rescue operations in drowning victims and the importance of education on opioid-associated emergencies. Other 2015 highlights in recognition and activation include the critical role of dispatcher recognition and dispatch-assisted chest compressions, which has been demonstrated in multiple international jurisdictions with consistent improvements in cardiac arrest survival. Similar to the 2010 ILCOR BLS treatment recommendations, the importance of high quality was reemphasized across all measures of CPR quality: rate, depth, recoil, and minimal chest compression pauses, with a universal understanding that we all should be providing chest compressions to all victims of cardiac arrest. This review continued to focus on the interface of BLS sequencing and ensuring high-quality CPR with other important BLS interventions, such as ventilation and defibrillation. In addition, this consensus statement highlights the importance of EMS systems, which employ bundles of care focusing on providing high-quality chest compressions while extricating the patient from the scene to the next level of care. Highlights in defibrillation indicate the global importance of increasing the number of sites with public-access defibrillation programs. Whereas the 2010 ILCOR Consensus on Science provided important direction for the “what” in resuscitation (ie, what to do), the 2015 consensus has begun with the GRADE methodology to provide direction for the quality of resuscitation. We hope that resuscitation councils and other stakeholders will be able to translate this body of knowledge of international consensus statements to build their own effective resuscitation guidelines.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Chest-compression-only versus standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a meta-analysis.

              In out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, dispatcher-assisted chest-compression-only bystander CPR might be superior to standard bystander CPR (chest compression plus rescue ventilation), but trial findings have not shown significantly improved outcomes. We aimed to establish the association of chest-compression-only CPR with survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Medline and Embase were systematically reviewed for studies published between January, 1985, and August, 2010, in which chest-compression-only bystander CPR was compared with standard bystander CPR for adult patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. In the primary meta-analysis, we included trials in which patients were randomly allocated to receive one of the two CPR techniques, according to dispatcher instructions; and in the secondary meta-analysis, we included observational cohort studies of chest-compression-only CPR. All studies had to supply survival data. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. A fixed-effects model was used for both meta-analyses because of an absence of heterogeneity among the studies (I(2)=0%). In the primary meta-analysis, pooled data from three randomised trials showed that chest-compression-only CPR was associated with improved chance of survival compared with standard CPR (14% [211/1500] vs 12% [178/1531]; risk ratio 1·22, 95% CI 1·01-1·46). The absolute increase in survival was 2·4% (95% CI 0·1-4·9), and the number needed to treat was 41 (95% CI 20-1250). In the secondary meta-analysis of seven observational cohort studies, no difference was recorded between the two CPR techniques (8% [223/2731] vs 8% [863/11 152]; risk ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·83-1·11). For adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, instructions to bystanders from emergency medical services dispatch should focus on chest-compression-only CPR. US National Institutes of Health and American Heart Association. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Yonsei Med J
                Yonsei Med. J
                YMJ
                Yonsei Medical Journal
                Yonsei University College of Medicine
                0513-5796
                1976-2437
                01 December 2018
                15 November 2018
                : 59
                : 10
                : 1232-1239
                Affiliations
                Department of Emergency Medicine, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea.
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Kyoung-Chul Cha, MD, PhD, Department of Emergency Medicine, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, 20 Ilsan-ro, Wonju 26426, Korea. Tel: 82-33-741-1617, Fax: 82-33-742-3030, chaemp@ 123456yonsei.ac.kr
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1818-2466
                Article
                10.3349/ymj.2018.59.10.1232
                6240573
                30450858
                1166a6bf-3adf-4a43-99ad-68f3176c8c94
                © Copyright: Yonsei University College of Medicine 2018

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 15 June 2018
                : 03 October 2018
                : 04 October 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: National Research Foundation of Korea, CrossRef https://doi.org/10.13039/501100003725;
                Award ID: NRF-2017R1C1B1011416
                Categories
                Original Article
                Emergency Medicine

                Medicine
                heart arrest,cardiopulmonary resuscitation,ventilation,treatment outcome
                Medicine
                heart arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, ventilation, treatment outcome

                Comments

                Comment on this article