Comparison of in-hospital use of mechanical chest compression devices for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients: AUTOPULSE vs LUCAS.

This study aimed to investigate the prognostic difference between AUTOPULSE and LUCAS for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) adult patients.A retrospective observational study was performed nationwide. Adult OHCA patients after receiving in-hospital mechanical chest compression from 2012 to 2016 were included. The primary outcomes were sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) of more than 20 minutes and survival to discharge.Among 142,906 OHCA patients, 820 patients were finally included. In multivariate analysis, female (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33-0.99), witnessed arrest (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.20-3.69), and arrest cause of non-cardiac origin (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.10-0.62) were significantly associated with the increase in ROSC. LUCAS showed a lower survival than AUTOPULSE (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.84), although it showed no significant association with ROSC. Percutaneous coronary intervention (OR, 6.30; 95% CI, 1.53-25.95) and target temperature management (TTM; OR, 7.30; 95% CI, 2.27-23.49) were the independent factors for survival. We categorized mechanical CPR recipients by witness to compare prognostic effectiveness of AUTOPULSE and LUCAS. In the witnessed subgroup, female (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24-0.89) was a prognostic factor for ROSC and shockable rhythm (OR, 5.04; 95% CI, 1.00-25.30), percutaneous coronary intervention (OR, 12.42; 95% CI, 2.04-75.53), and TTM (OR, 9.03; 95% CI, 1.86-43.78) for survival. In the unwitnessed subgroup, no prognostic factors were found for ROSC, and TTM (OR, 99.00; 95% CI, 8.9-1100.62) was found to be an independent factor for survival. LUCAS showed no significant increase in ROSC or survival in comparison with AUTOPULSE in both subgroups.The in-hospital use of LUCAS may have a deleterious effect for survival compared with AUTOPULSE.

Mechanical chest compressions for cardiac arrest in the cath-lab: when is it enough and who should go to extracorporeal cardio pulmonary resuscitation?

BACKGROUND: Treating patients in cardiac arrest (CA) with mechanical chest compressions (MCC) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is now routine in many coronary catheterization laboratories (cath-lab) and more aggressive treatment modalities, including extracorporeal CPR are becoming more common. The cath-lab setting enables monitoring of vital physiological parameters and other clinical factors that can potentially guide the resuscitation effort. This retrospective analysis attempts to identify such factors associated with ROSC and survival. METHODS: In thirty-five patients of which background data, drugs used during the resuscitation and the intervention, PCI result, post ROSC-treatment and physiologic data collected during CPR were compared for prediction of ROSC and survival. RESULTS: Eighteen (51%) patients obtained ROSC and 9 (26%) patients survived with good neurological outcome. There was no difference between groups in regards of background data. Patients arriving in the cath-lab with ongoing resuscitation efforts had lower ROSC rate (22% vs 53%; p = 0.086) and no survivors (0% vs 50%, p = 0.001). CPR time also differentiated resuscitation outcomes (ROSC: 18 min vs No ROSC: 50 min; p = 0.007 and Survivors: 10 min vs No Survivors: 45 min; p = 0.001). Higher arterial diastolic blood pressure was associated with ROSC: 30 mmHg vs No ROSC: 19 mmHg; p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Aortic diastolic pressure during CPR is the most predictive physiological parameter of resuscitation success. Ongoing CPR upon arrival at the cath-lab and continued MCC beyond 10-20 min in the cath-lab were both predictive of poor outcomes. These factors can potentially guide decisions regarding escalation and termination of resuscitation efforts.

Door-to-Targeted Temperature Management Initiation Time and Outcomes in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: Insights From the Continuous Chest Compressions Trial.

Background Targeted temperature management ( TTM ) is a recommended treatment modality to improve neurological outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The impact of the duration from hospital admission to TTM initiation (door-to- TTM ; DTT ) on clinical outcomes has not been well elucidated. We hypothesized that shorter DTT initiation intervals would be associated with improved survival with favorable neurological outcome. Methods and Results We performed a post hoc analysis of nontraumatic paramedic-treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. The primary outcome was favorable neurological status at hospital discharge, with a secondary outcome of survival to discharge. We fit a logistic regression analysis to determine the association of early compared with delayed DTT , dichotomized by the median DTT duration, and outcomes. Of 3805 patients enrolled in the CCC (Continuous Chest Compressions) Trial in British Columbia, 570 were included in this analysis. There was substantial variation in DTT among patients receiving TTM . The median DTT duration was 122 minutes (interquartile range 35-218). Favorable neurological outcomes in the early and delayed DTT groups were 48% and 38%, respectively. Compared with delayed DTT (interquartile range 167-319 minutes), early DTT (interquartile range 20-81 minutes) was associated with survival (adjusted odds ratio 1.56, 95% CI 1.02-2.38) but not with favorable neurological outcomes (adjusted odds ratio 1.45, 95% CI , 0.94-2.22) at hospital discharge. Conclusions There was wide variability in the initiation of TTM among comatose out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors. Initiation of TTM within 122 minutes of hospital admission was associated with improved survival. These results support in-hospital efforts to achieve early DTT among out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients admitted to the hospital.

Closed chest compressions reduce survival in an animal model of haemorrhage-induced traumatic cardiac arrest.

Closed chest compressions (CCC) are recommended for medical cardiac arrest, but there is little evidence to support their inclusion for traumatic cardiac arrest (TCA). This laboratory study evaluated CCC following haemorrhage-induced TCA and whether resuscitation with blood improved survival compared to saline. The study was conducted with the authority of UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (received institutional ethical approval and a Home Office Licence) using 39 terminally anesthetised, instrumented, juvenile Large White pigs. Following baseline measurements, animals underwent captive bolt injury to the right thigh and controlled haemorrhage (30% blood volume). Sixty minutes later there was a further haemorrhage to a MAP of 20 mmHg. The randomised resuscitation protocol was initiated within 5 min: CCC (Group 1); IV whole blood (Group 2); IV 0.9% saline (Group 3); IV whole blood + CCC (Group 4); and IV saline + CCC (Group 5). Fluid was administered as 3 × 10 ml/kg boluses using the Belmont® Rapid Infuser. The LUCAS™ II Chest Compression System delivered CCC. Primary Outcome was attainment of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC MAP ≥ 50 mmHg) at Study End (fifteen minutes post-resuscitation) and secondary outcomes included haemodynamics. Mortality (MAP≤10 mmHg) was significantly higher in Group 1 compared to Groups 2 and 3 (P < 0.0001). Resuscitation with whole blood was significantly better than saline (P = 0.0069), no animals in Group 3 attained ROSC. The addition of chest compressions to fluid resuscitation resulted in a significantly worse outcome with saline resuscitation (P = 0.0023) but not with whole blood (P = 0.4411). Cardiovascular variables at the end of the Resuscitation Phase and Study End were significantly worse for Group 5 compared to Group 3. Some significant differences were present at the end of the Resuscitation Phase for Group 4 versus Group 2 but these differences were no longer present by Study End. CCC were associated with increased mortality and compromised haemodynamics compared to intravenous fluid resuscitation. Whole blood resuscitation was better than saline.

Cardiac massage for trauma patients in the battlefield: An assessment for survivors.

INTRODUCTION: Survival from traumatic cardiopulmonary arrest (TCA) has been reported at a rate as low as 0-2.6% in the civilian pre-hospital setting, and many consider resuscitation of this group to be futile. The aim of this investigation was to describe patients who received cardiac massage during TCA in a battlefield setting; we also aimed to identify predictors of survival. METHODS: We conducted a review of the Department of Defense Trauma Registry to identify patients who received cardiac massage in the battlefield between 2007 and 2014. Patients were also grouped according to location of cardiac arrest: pre-hospital (PH) and in-hospital (IH). The groups were compared and evaluated by injury, transport time, type of resuscitation, and pre-hospital procedures. Outcome variables included survival to discharge and 30-day survival. Categorical variables were analysed using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. Wilcoxon tests were performed for continuous variables. Regression modelling was used to assess for predictors of survival. RESULTS: 75 of all 582 patients (13%, 95% CI 10-16) survived to 30 days, and all survivors were transported out of the battlefield; 23 PH (7.8%, 95% CI 5.2-12) and 52 IH (17%, 95% CI 13-22) patients survived to 30 days (p < 0.001). Closed-chest cardiac massage with the administration of intravenous medications was associated with 30-day survival among IH patients. CONCLUSIONS: We report a 13% survival to 30 days among all patients receiving cardiac massage in a battlefield setting. Closed-chest cardiac massage predicted survival among IH TCA victims who also received intravenous medications in this review of combat-related TCA.

Chest-compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for children with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: For children with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, previous observational studies regarding chest-compression-only CPR (CC-CPR) versus conventional CPR yielded inconsistent results. We aimed to summarize the current evidence and compare the outcomes after CC-CPR with those after conventional CPR by bystanders in children with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS: Observational studies that compared CC-CPR to conventional CPR for children with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were identified through systematic searches of three databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library). The primary outcome was 30-day survival after hospital discharge. STATA 11.0 was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Five studies with 14,427 participants were included. Pooled results indicated that children who received conventional CPR had a higher 30-day survival than those who received CC-CPR (odds ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.74). Moreover, conventional CPR led to a higher 30-day neurologically intact survival compared to CC-CPR (odds ratio, 1.63; 95%CI, 1.30-2.04). Subgroup analyses showed that the higher survival associated with conventional CPR was only significant in children who had cardiac arrest with non-cardiac causes (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40). CONCLUSIONS: Children who receive conventional CPR for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest may have better outcomes than those who receive CC-CPR. Due to the limited number of studies and lack of randomized trials included in this meta-analysis, more evidence is needed to confirm our findings.

Cardiovascular risk factors differently affect the survival of patients undergoing manual or mechanical resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: Chest compression is a decisive element of cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR). By applying a mechanical CPR device, compression interruptions can be minimised. We examined the efficiency of manual and device-assisted resuscitation as well as the effects of cardiovascular risk factors on the outcome of resuscitation. METHODS: In our retrospective, randomised 3-year study the data of adult patients suffering non-traumatic, out-of-hospital, sudden cardiac death (SCD) were analysed (n = 287). The data were retrieved by processing case reports, Utstein sheets and acute coronary syndrome sheets. We compared the data of patients undergoing manual (n = 232) and device-assisted resuscitation (LUCAS-2, n = 55). The primary endpoint was the on-site restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: In 37% of the cases ROSC happened. With respect to ROSC an insignificantly more favourable tendency was demonstrated in the case of device-assisted resuscitation (p = 0.072). In the Lucas group, a higher success rate occurred even in the case of prolonged resuscitation. We found a better outcome in the Lucas group in the case of CPR started a longer time after the SCD (p < 0.05). A positive correlation was established between age and unsuccessful resuscitation (p = < 0.017; r = 0.125). An unfavourable correlation was observed between hypertension and the outcome of resuscitation (p = 0.018; r = 0.143). According to our results the presence of left ventricular hypertrophy poses 5.1-fold risk of unsuccessful CPR (CI: 4.97-5.29). Advanced age and structural heart diseases can play a role in the genesis of SCD. Importantly, left ventricular hypertrophy and hypertension negatively affect survival.

Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical chest compression devices have been proposed to improve the effectiveness of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of resuscitation strategies using mechanical chest compressions versus resuscitation strategies using standard manual chest compressions with respect to neurologically intact survival in patients who suffer cardiac arrest. SEARCH METHODS: On 19 August 2017 we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Studies (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science databases. Biotechnology and Bioengineering Abstracts and Science Citation abstracts had been searched up to November 2009 for prior versions of this review. We also searched two clinical trials registries for any ongoing trials not captured by our search of databases containing published works: Clinicaltrials.gov (August 2017) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform portal (January 2018). We applied no language restrictions. We contacted experts in the field of mechanical chest compression devices and manufacturers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs and quasi-randomised studies comparing mechanical chest compressions versus manual chest compressions during CPR for patients with cardiac arrest. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included five new studies in this update. In total, we included 11 trials in the review, including data from 12,944 adult participants, who suffered either out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) or in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We excluded studies explicitly including patients with cardiac arrest caused by trauma, drowning, hypothermia and toxic substances. These conditions are routinely excluded from cardiac arrest intervention studies because they have a different underlying pathophysiology, require a variety of interventions specific to the underlying condition and are known to have a prognosis different from that of cardiac arrest with no obvious cause. The exclusions were meant to reduce heterogeneity in the population while maintaining generalisability to most patients with sudden cardiac death.The overall quality of evidence for the outcomes of included studies was moderate to low due to considerable risk of bias. Three studies (N = 7587) reported on the designated primary outcome of survival to hospital discharge with good neurologic function (defined as a Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) score of one or two), which had moderate quality evidence. One study showed no difference with mechanical chest compressions (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.39), one study demonstrated equivalence (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.04), and one study demonstrated reduced survival (RR 0.41, CI 0.21 to 0.79). Two other secondary outcomes, survival to hospital admission (N = 7224) and survival to hospital discharge (N = 8067), also had moderate quality level of evidence. No studies reported a difference in survival to hospital admission. For survival to hospital discharge, two studies showed benefit, four studies showed no difference, and one study showed harm associated with mechanical compressions. No studies demonstrated a difference in adverse events or injury patterns between comparison groups but the quality of data was low. Marked clinical and statistical heterogeneity between studies precluded any pooled estimates of effect. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence does not suggest that CPR protocols involving mechanical chest compression devices are superior to conventional therapy involving manual chest compressions only. We conclude on the balance of evidence that mechanical chest compression devices used by trained individuals are a reasonable alternative to manual chest compressions in settings where consistent, high-quality manual chest compressions are not possible or dangerous for the provider (eg, limited rescuers available, prolonged CPR, during hypothermic cardiac arrest, in a moving ambulance, in the angiography suite, during preparation for extracorporeal CPR [ECPR], etc.). Systems choosing to incorporate mechanical chest compression devices should be closely monitored because some data identified in this review suggested harm. Special attention should be paid to minimising time without compressions and delays to defibrillation during device deployment.

2017 American Heart Association Focused Update on Adult Basic Life Support and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Quality: An Update to the American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a lifesaving technique for victims of sudden cardiac arrest. Despite advances in resuscitation science, basic life support remains a critical factor in determining outcomes. The American Heart Association recommendations for adult basic life support incorporate the most recently published evidence and serve as the basis for education and training for laypeople and healthcare providers who perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

2017 American Heart Association Focused Update on Pediatric Basic Life Support and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Quality: An Update to the American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.

This focused update to the American Heart Association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and emergency cardiovascular care follows the Pediatric Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation evidence review. It aligns with the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation's continuous evidence review process, and updates are published when the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation completes a literature review based on new science. This update provides the evidence review and treatment recommendation for chest compression-only CPR versus CPR using chest compressions with rescue breaths for children <18 years of age. Four large database studies were available for review, including 2 published after the "2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care." Two demonstrated worse 30-day outcomes with chest compression-only CPR for children 1 through 18 years of age, whereas 2 studies documented no difference between chest compression-only CPR and CPR using chest compressions with rescue breaths. When the results were analyzed for infants <1 year of age, CPR using chest compressions with rescue breaths was better than no CPR but was no different from chest compression-only CPR in 1 study, whereas another study observed no differences among chest compression-only CPR, CPR using chest compressions with rescue breaths, and no CPR. CPR using chest compressions with rescue breaths should be provided for infants and children in cardiac arrest. If bystanders are unwilling or unable to deliver rescue breaths, we recommend that rescuers provide chest compressions for infants and children.

An automatic system for the comprehensive retrospective analysis of cardiac rhythms in resuscitation episodes.

AIM: An automatic resuscitation rhythm annotator (ARA) would facilitate and enhance retrospective analysis of resuscitation data, contributing to a better understanding of the interplay between therapy and patient response. The objective of this study was to define, implement, and demonstrate an ARA architecture for complete resuscitation episodes, including chest compression pauses (CC-pauses) and chest compression intervals (CC-intervals). METHODS: We analyzed 126.5h of ECG and accelerometer-based chest-compression depth data from 281 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. Data were annotated by expert reviewers into asystole (AS), pulseless electrical activity (PEA), pulse-generating rhythm (PR), ventricular fibrillation (VF), and ventricular tachycardia (VT). Clinical pulse annotations were based on patient-charts and impedance measurements. An ARA was developed for CC-pauses, and was used in combination with a chest compression artefact removal filter during CC-intervals. The performance of the ARA was assessed in terms of the unweighted mean of sensitivities (UMS). RESULTS: The UMS of the ARA were 75.0% during CC-pauses and 52.5% during CC-intervals, 55-points and 32.5-points over a random guess (20% for five categories). Filtering increased the UMS during CC-intervals by 5.2-points. Sensitivities for AS, PEA, PR, VF, and VT were 66.8%, 55.8%, 86.5%, 82.1% and 83.8% during CC-pauses; and 51.1%, 34.1%, 58.7%, 86.4%, and 32.1% during CC-intervals. CONCLUSIONS: A general ARA architecture was defined and demonstrated on a comprehensive OHCA dataset. Results showed that semi-automatic resuscitation rhythm annotation, which may involve further revision/correction by clinicians for quality assurance, is feasible. The performance (UMS) dropped significantly during CC-intervals and sensitivity was lowest for PEA.

Chest compression-related fatal internal mammary artery injuries manifesting after venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation-related bleeding, especially internal mammary artery injuries, can become life-threatening complications after initiating venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation owing to the frequent involvement of concomitant anticoagulant treatment, antiplatelet treatment, targeted temperature management, and bleeding coagulopathy. We report the cases of five patients who experienced this complication and discuss their management. CASE PRESENTATION: We retrospectively evaluated five patients with cardiopulmonary resuscitation-related internal mammary artery injuries who were treated between February 2011 and February 2016 at our institution. All five patients were Asian men, aged 56 to 68-years old, who had received concomitant intravenously administered unfractionated heparin (3000 units) with antiplatelet therapy. Four patients received targeted temperature management. The injuries and hematomas were detected using contrast-enhanced computed tomography in all cases. Three patients were treated using transcatheter arterial embolization within 6 hours following cardiopulmonary arrest, and two were resuscitated and received appropriate treatment following early recognition of their injuries. Two patients died of hemorrhagic shock with delayed intervention. Four of the five patients had excessively prolonged activated partial thromboplastin times before their interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Computed tomography should be performed as soon as possible after the return of spontaneous circulation to identify injuries and consider appropriate treatments for patients who have experienced cardiac arrest. Delayed bleeding may develop after treating hypovolemic shock and relieving arterial spasms; therefore, transcatheter arterial embolization should be performed aggressively to prevent delayed bleeding even in the absence of extravasation. This approach may be superior to thoracotomy because it is less invasive, causes less bleeding, and can selectively stop arterial bleeding sooner. A 3000-unit intravenous bolus of unfractionated heparin may be redundant; heparin-free extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation may be a more appropriate alternative. Unfractionated heparin treatment can commence after the bleeding has stopped.

Use of automated chest compression devices after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Sweden.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the implementation of automated chest compression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACC-CPR) after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in Sweden during the years 2011 through 2015. The association between ACC-CPR and 30-day survival was studied as a secondary objective. METHODS: The Swedish cardiopulmonary resuscitation registry is a prospectively recorded nationwide registry of modified Utstein parameters including all patients with attempted resuscitation after OHCA. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for known confounders in the secondary analysis. RESULTS: Of the 24,316 patients included in the study population, 32.4% received ACC-CPR, with substantial regional variation ranging from 0.8% to 78.8%. Male gender and an initial shockable rhythm were associated with ACC-CPR, whereas crew witnessed status was associated with manual CPR. Potential markers of prolonged resuscitation attempts (drug administration and endotracheal intubation) were more prevalent in the ACC-CPR group. The unadjusted 30-day survival rate was 6.3% for ACC-CPR patients. The adjusted odds ratio for 30-day survival regarding use of an ACC device was 0.72 (95% CI 0.62-0.84, p<0.001, n=13922). CONCLUSION: The use of ACC devices varied significantly between Swedish regions and overall survival to 30days was low among patients receiving ACC-CPR. Although measured and unmeasured confounding might explain our finding of lower survival rates for patients exposed to ACC-CPR, specific guidelines recommending when and how ACC-CPR should be used are warranted as there might be circumstances where these devices do more harm than good.

End-Tidal CO2-Guided Chest Compression Delivery Improves Survival in a Neonatal Asphyxial Cardiac Arrest Model.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether end-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery improves survival over standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation after prolonged asphyxial arrest. DESIGN: Preclinical randomized controlled study. SETTING: University animal research laboratory. SUBJECTS: 1-2-week-old swine. INTERVENTIONS: After undergoing a 20-minute asphyxial arrest, animals received either standard or end-tidal CO2-guided cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In the standard group, chest compression delivery was optimized by video and verbal feedback to maintain the rate, depth, and release within published guidelines. In the end-tidal CO2-guided group, chest compression rate and depth were adjusted to obtain a maximal end-tidal CO2 level without other feedback. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation included 10 minutes of basic life support followed by advanced life support for 10 minutes or until return of spontaneous circulation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mean end-tidal CO2 at 10 minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 34 ± 8 torr in the end-tidal CO2 group (n = 14) and 19 ± 9 torr in the standard group (n = 14; p = 0.0001). The return of spontaneous circulation rate was 7 of 14 (50%) in the end-tidal CO2 group and 2 of 14 (14%) in the standard group (p = 0.04). The chest compression rate averaged 143 ± 10/min in the end-tidal CO2 group and 102 ± 2/min in the standard group (p < 0.0001). Neither asphyxia-related hypercarbia nor epinephrine administration confounded the use of end-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery. The response of the relaxation arterial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressure to the initial epinephrine administration was greater in the end-tidal CO2 group than in the standard group (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03, respectively). The prevalence of resuscitation-related injuries was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: End-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery is an effective resuscitation method that improves early survival after prolonged asphyxial arrest in this neonatal piglet model. Optimizing end-tidal CO2 levels during cardiopulmonary resuscitation required that chest compression delivery rate exceed current guidelines. The use of physiologic feedback during cardiopulmonary resuscitation has the potential to provide optimized and individualized resuscitative efforts.

Bystander fatigue and CPR quality by older bystanders: a randomized crossover trial comparing continuous chest compressions and 30:2 compressions to ventilations.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to measure bystander fatigue and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality after five minutes of CPR using the continuous chest compression (CCC) versus the 30:2 chest compression to ventilation method in older lay persons, a population most likely to perform CPR on cardiac arrest victims. METHODS: This randomized crossover trial took place at three tertiary care hospitals and a seniors' center. Participants were aged ≥55 years without significant physical limitations (frailty score ≤3/7). They completed two 5-minute CPR sessions (using 30:2 and CCC) on manikins; sessions were separated by a rest period. We used concealed block randomization to determine CPR method order. Metronome feedback maintained a compression rate of 100/minute. We measured heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and Borg Exertion Scale. CPR quality measures included total number of compressions and number of adequate compressions (depth ≥5 cm). RESULTS: Sixty-three participants were enrolled: mean age 70.8 years, female 66.7%, past CPR training 60.3%. Bystander fatigue was similar between CPR methods: mean difference in HR -0.59 (95% CI -3.51-2.33), MAP 1.64 (95% CI -0.23-3.50), and Borg 0.46 (95% CI 0.07-0.84). Compared to 30:2, participants using CCC performed more chest compressions (480.0 v. 376.3, mean difference 107.7; p<0.0001) and more adequate chest compressions (381.5 v. 324.9, mean difference. 62.0; p=0.0001), although good compressions/minute declined significantly faster with the CCC method (p=0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: CPR quality decreased significantly faster when performing CCC compared to 30:2. However, performing CCC produced more adequate compressions overall with a similar level of fatigue compared to the 30:2 method.

Improving Survival From Cardiac Arrest: A Review of Contemporary Practice and Challenges.

Cardiac arrest is a common and lethal condition frequently encountered by emergency medicine providers. Resuscitation of persons after cardiac arrest remains challenging, and outcomes remain poor overall. Successful resuscitation hinges on timely, high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The optimal method of providing chest compressions and ventilator support during cardiac arrest remains uncertain. Prompt and effective defibrillation of ventricular arrhythmias is one of the few effective therapies available for treatment of cardiac arrest. Despite numerous studies during several decades, no specific drug delivered during cardiac arrest has been shown to improve neurologically intact survival after cardiac arrest. Extracorporeal circulation can rescue a minority of highly selected patients with refractory cardiac arrest. Current management of pulseless electrical activity is associated with poor outcomes, but it is hoped that a more targeted diagnostic approach based on electrocardiography and bedside cardiac ultrasonography may improve survival. The evolution of postresuscitation care appears to have improved cardiac arrest outcomes in patients who are successfully resuscitated. The initial approach to early stabilization includes standard measures, such as support of pulmonary function, hemodynamic stabilization, and rapid diagnostic assessment. Coronary angiography is often indicated because of the high frequency of unstable coronary artery disease in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest and should be performed early after resuscitation. Optimizing and standardizing our current approach to cardiac arrest resuscitation and postresuscitation care will be essential for developing strategies for improving survival after cardiac arrest.

A focused investigation of expedited, stack of three shocks versus chest compressions first followed by single shocks for monitored ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia cardiopulmonary arrest in an in-hospital setting.

BACKGROUND: In cases of in-hospital-witnessed ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia (VF/VT) arrest, it is unclear whether cardiopulmonary resuscitation prior to defibrillation attempt or expedited stacked defibrillation attempt is superior. METHODS: Retrospective, observational study of all admitted patients with continuous cardiac monitoring who suffered VF/VT arrest between July 2005 and June 2013. In the stacked shock period (2005-2008), institutional protocols advocated early defibrillation with administration of 3 stacked shocks with brief pauses between each single defibrillation attempt to confirm sustained VF/VT. During the initial chest compression period (2008-2011), the protocol was modified to perform a 2-minute period of chest compressions prior to each defibrillation, including the initial. In the modified stack shock period (2011-2013), for a monitored arrest, defibrillation attempts were expedited with up to 3 successive shocks administered for persistent VF/VT. In unmonitored arrest, chest compressions and ventilations were initiated prior to defibrillation. The primary outcome measure was survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-one cardiopulmonary arrests were recorded during the study period, with 106 patients (16%) representing primary VF/VT. The incidence of VF/VT arrest did not vary significantly between the study periods (P= 0.16) Survival to hospital discharge for all primary VF/VT arrest victims decreased, then increased significantly from the stacked shock period to initial chest compression period to modified stacked shock period (58%, 18%, 71%, respectively, P < 0.01). Specific group differences were significant between the initial chest compression versus the stacked and modified stacked shock groups (all P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Data suggest that monitored VF/VT should undergo expeditious defibrillation with use of stacked shocks.

Manual Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Versus CPR Including a Mechanical Chest Compression Device in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis From Randomized and Observational Studies.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Mechanical chest compression devices have been developed to facilitate continuous delivery of high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Despite promising hemodynamic data, evidence on clinical outcomes remains inconclusive. With the completion of 3 randomized controlled trials, we conduct a meta-analysis on the effect of in-field mechanical versus manual CPR on clinical outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS: With a systematic search (PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Libraries), we identified all eligible studies (randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies) that compared a CPR strategy including an automated mechanical chest compression device with a strategy of manual CPR only. Outcome variables were survival to hospital admission, survival to discharge, and favorable neurologic outcome. RESULTS: Twenty studies (n=21,363) were analyzed: 5 randomized controlled trials and 15 nonrandomized studies, pooled separately. For survival to admission, the pooled estimate of the randomized controlled trials did not indicate a difference (odds ratio 0.94; 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.05; P=.24) between mechanical and manual CPR. In contrast, meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies demonstrated a benefit in favor of mechanical CPR (odds ratio 1.42; 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.67; P<.001). No interaction was found between the endorsed CPR guidelines (2000 versus 2005) and the CPR strategy (P=.27). Survival to discharge and neurologic outcome did not differ between strategies. CONCLUSION: Although there are lower-quality, observational data that suggest that mechanical CPR used at the rescuer's discretion could improve survival to hospital admission, the cumulative high-quality randomized evidence does not support a routine strategy of mechanical CPR to improve survival or neurologic outcome. These findings are irrespective of the endorsed CPR guidelines during the study periods.