Recovery of arterial blood pressure after chest compression pauses in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Chest compressions generating good perfusion during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in cardiac arrest patients are critical for positive patient outcomes. Conventional wisdom advises minimizing compression pauses because several compressions are required to recover arterial blood pressure (ABP) back to pre-pause values. Our study examines how compression pauses influence ABP recovery post-pause in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS: We analyzed data from a subset of a prospective, randomized LUCAS 2 Active Decompression trial. Patients were treated by an anesthesiologist-staffed rapid response car program in Oslo, Norway (2015-2017) with mechanical chest compressions using the LUCAS device at 102 compressions/min. Patients with an ABP signal during CPR and at least one compression pause >2 sec were included. Arterial cannulation, compression pauses, and ECG during the pause were verified by physician review of patient records and physiological signals. Pauses were excluded if return of spontaneous circulation occurred during the pause (pressure pulses associated with ECG complexes). Compression, mean, and decompression ABP for 10 compressions before/after each pause and the mean ABP during the pause were measured with custom MATLAB code. The relationship between pause duration and ABP recovery was investigated using linear regression. RESULTS: We included 56 patients with a total of 271 pauses (pause duration: median = 11 sec, Q1 = 7 sec, Q3 = 18 sec). Mean ABP dropped from 53 ± 10 mmHg for the last pre-pause compression to 33 ± 7 mmHg during the pause. Compression and mean ABP recovered to >90% of pre-pause pressure within 2 compressions, or 1.7 sec. Pause duration did not affect the recovery of ABP post-pause (R2: 0.05, 0.03, 0.01 for compression, mean, and decompression ABP, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: ABP generated by mechanical CPR recovered quickly after pauses. Recovery of ABP after a pause was independent of pause duration.

Ventilation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation with mechanical chest compressions: How often are two insufflations being given during the 3-second ventilation pauses?

BACKGROUND: Mechanical chest compression devices in 30:2 mode provide 3-second pauses to allow for two insufflations. We aimed to determine how often two insufflations are provided in these ventilation pauses, in order to assess if prehospital providers are able to ventilate out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients successfully during mechanical chest compressions. METHODS: Data from OHCA cases of the regional ambulance service of Utrecht, The Netherlands, were prospectively collected in the UTrecht studygroup for OPtimal registry of cardIAc arrest database (UTOPIA). Compression pauses and insufflations were visualized on thoracic impedance and waveform capnography signals recorded by manual defibrillators. Ventilation pauses were analyzed for number of insufflations, duration of the subintervals of the ventilation cycles, and ratio of successfully providing two insufflations over the course of the resuscitation. Generalized linear mixed effects models were used to accurately estimate proportions and means. RESULTS: In 250 cases, 8473 ventilation pauses were identified, of which 4305 (51%) included two insufflations. When corrected for non-independence of the data across repeated measures within the same subjects with a mixed effects analysis, two insufflations were successfully provided in 45% of ventilation pauses (95% CI: 40-50%). In 19% (95% CI: 16-22%) none were given. CONCLUSION: Providing two insufflations during pauses in mechanical chest compressions is mostly unsuccessful. We recommend developing strategies to improve giving insufflations when using mechanical chest compression devices. Increasing the pause duration might help to improve insufflation success.

Standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus chest compressions only after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The 2020 American Heart Association guidelines encourage lay rescuers to provide chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation to simplify the process and encourage cardiopulmonary resuscitation initiation. However, recent clinical trials had contradictory results about chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This study will aim to compare standard and chest compressions-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will retrieve only randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science and Embase databases. Data on study design, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcomes will be extracted by a unified standard form. Primary outcomes to be assessed are hospital admission, discharge, and 30-day survival, and return of spontaneous circulation. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework will evaluate the quality of evidence. Cochrane's tool for assessing the risk of bias will evaluate risk deviation. If the I2 statistic is lower than 40%, the fixed-effects model will be used for meta-analysis. Otherwise, the random-effects model will be used. The search will be performed following the publication of this protocol (estimated to occur on 30 December 2024). DISCUSSION: This study will evaluate the effect of chest compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and provide evidence for cardiopulmonary resuscitation guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No patient or public entity will be involved in this study. Therefore, the study does not need to be ethically reviewed. The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications and committee conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021295507.

The association of recent simulation training and clinical experience of team leaders with cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality during in-hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the association of recent team leader simulation training (<6 months) and years of clinical experience (≥4 years) with chest compression quality during in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). METHODS: This cohort study of IHCA in four Danish hospitals included cases with data on chest compression quality and team leader characteristics. We assessed the impact of recent simulation training and experienced team leaders on longest chest compression pause duration (primary outcome), chest compression fraction (CCF), and chest compression rates within guideline recommendations using mixed effects models. RESULTS: Of 157 included resuscitation attempts, 45% had a team leader who recently participated in simulation training and 66% had an experienced team leader. The median team leader experience was 7 years [Q1; Q3: 4; 11]. The median duration of the longest chest compression pause was 16 s [10; 30]. Having a team leader with recent simulation training was associated with significantly shorter longest pause durations (difference: -7.11 s (95%-CI: -12.0; -2.2), p = 0.004), a higher CCF (difference: 3% (95%-CI: 2.0; 4.0%), p < 0.001) and with less guideline compliant chest compression rates (odds ratio: 0.4 (95%-CI: 0.19; 0.84), p = 0.02). Having an experienced team leader was not associated with longest pause duration (difference: -1.57 s (95%-CI: -5.34; 2.21), p = 0.42), CCF (difference: 0.7% (95%-CI: -0.3; 1.7), p = 0.17) or chest compression rates within guideline recommendations (odds ratio: 1.55 (95%-CI: 0.91; 2.66), p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: Recent simulation training of team leaders, but not years of team leader experience, was associated with shorter chest compression pauses during IHCA.

A new method of pulse control in cardiopulmonary resuscitation; Continuous femoral pulse check.

OBJECTIVES: The reliability of manual pulse checks has been questioned but is still recommended in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guidelines. The aim is to compare the 10-s carotid pulse check (CPC) between heart massage cycles with the continuous femoral pulse check (CoFe PuC) in CPR, and to propose a better location to shorten the interruption times for pulse check. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on 117 Non-traumatic CPR patients between January 2020 and January 2022. A total of 702 dependent pulse measurements were executed, where carotid and femoral pulses were simultaneously assessed. Cardiac ultrasound, end-tidal CO2, saturation, respiration, and blood pressure were employed for pulse validation. RESULTS: The decision time for determining the presence of a pulse in the last cycle of CPR was 3.03 ± 1.26 s for CoFe PuC, significantly shorter than the 10.31 ± 5.24 s for CPC. CoFe PuC predicted the absence of pulse with 74% sensitivity and 88% specificity, while CPC predicted the absence of pulse with 91% sensitivity and 61% specificity. CONCLUSION: CoFe PuC provides much earlier and more effective information about the pulse than CPC. This shortens the interruption times in CPR. CoFe PuC should be recommended as a new and useful method in CPR guidelines.

A case of pulmonary visceral subpleural hematoma treated by hematoma evacuation during care of post-cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: The occurrence of pulmonary visceral subpleural hematoma during care of post-cardiopulmonary resuscitation including chest compressions and anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies is extremely rare. Also, there are few reports of treatment of visceral subpleural hematoma, most of which are treated by lung resection. Here we describe a rare case that pulmonary visceral subpleural hematoma arose during post-cardiopulmonary resuscitation care and was treated by hematoma evacuation. CASE PRESENTATION: A 58-year-old male with no smoking history and, past medical histories of rheumatoid arthritis, chronic atrial fibrillation, hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia developed ventricular fibrillation due to myocardial infarction and fainted. He received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation by the ambulance crew and had return of spontaneous circulation. After transfer to our hospital, the patient underwent percutaneous catheter intervention and stenting with a diagnosis of myocardial infarction, followed by anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies. On the 8th hospital day, chest radiography suggested right lower lobe pneumonia, and subsequent chest computed tomography revealed pulmonary hematoma in the visceral subpleural area from S6 to S10. Since no improvement was observed in hypoxemia, treatment was considered necessary. First, an attempt at computed tomography-guided drainage of hematoma was made, but insertion of the Pig-tail catheter was difficult due to hardness of the hematoma. Next, evacuation of hematoma was performed on the 13th hospital day. The hematoma was located in the visceral subpleural area and was removed by incising the pleura. TachoSil Tissue Sealing sheet and Polyglycoal acid sheet were applied to the sites of air leakage and oozing after hematoma evacuation. No re-bleeding or air leakage was observed after the treatment, and the patient was discharged on the 26th hospital day after an uneventful course. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary visceral subpleural hematoma may occur during post-cardiopulmonary resuscitation care, including chest compressions and anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies. In our case, CT-guided puncture and drainage was difficult and surgical treatment by incision of the visceral pleura and hematoma evacuation alone was done successfully.

Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Devices: Evidence Synthesis with an Umbrella Review.

AIM: Sudden cardiac arrest is a significant cause of death worldwide. Good quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation increases patients' survival. Manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation is often ineffective as rescuers may experience physical and mental fatigue. Mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation devices are designed to address this issue, providing an automated approach for high-quality resuscitation. In the present comprehensive umbrella review we summarize current evidence on mechanical devices. METHODS: We searched systematic reviews on mechanical devices in MEDLINE/PubMed. Effect estimates were obtained from original reports, including 95% confidence intervals and p values, when applicable and available, focusing on return of spontaneous circulation, survival to discharge or 30 days, survival with good neurological outcome, and resuscitation-related injuries. RESULTS: From 21 potentially pertinent publications, we shortlisted 10 reviews, each including between 5 and 22 studies. AutoPulse, LUCAS, and LUCAS-2 were among the investigated devices. Most reviews concluded toward mechanical devices being similar or better than manual resuscitation for return of spontaneous circulation and 30-days survival. Regarding survival with good neurological function, some reviews lacked data, while the remaining ones reported similar results or worse outcomes in patients undergoing mechanical resuscitation. Focusing on resuscitation-related injuries, data were limited or conflicting with one review reporting higher rates of injuries with mechanical devices, and two others suggesting similar outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Manual and mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation appear to be similar in terms of return of spontaneous circulation and short-term survival. Mechanical devices appear to be associated with higher resuscitation-related injuries, while there are conflicting data in terms of survival with good neurological outcomes. A comprehensive and large dedicated randomized trial is urgently needed.

Comparison of manual chest compression versus mechanical chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a life-threatening condition that requires immediate intervention to increase the prospect of survival. There are various ways to achieve cardiopulmonary resuscitation in such patients, either through manual chest compression or mechanical chest compression. Thus, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the differences between these interventions. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were explored from inception to May 2023. Additionally, the bibliographies of relevant studies were searched. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies-I tools were utilized to perform quality and risk of bias assessments. RESULTS: There were 24 studies included within this quantitative synthesis, featuring a total of 111,681 cardiac arrest patients. Overall, no statistically significant differences were observed between the return of spontaneous circulation, survival to hospital discharge, short-term survival, and long-term survival. However, manual chest compression was associated with a significantly superior favorability of neurological outcomes (OR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.84; P = .01). CONCLUSION: Although there were no major differences between the strategies, the poorer post-resuscitation neurological outcomes observed in mechanical chest compression indicate the need for further innovation and advancements within the current array of mechanical devices. However, future high-quality studies are necessary in order to arrive at a valid conclusion.

Optimal chest compression for cardiac arrest until the establishment of ECPR: Secondary analysis of the SAVE-J II study.

INTRODUCTION: The widespread incorporation of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest requires the delivery of effective and high-quality chest compressions prior to the initiation of ECPR. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of mechanical and manual chest compressions until the initiation of ECPR. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the Japanese retrospective multicenter registry "Study of Advanced Life Support for Ventricular Fibrillation by Extracorporeal Circulation II (SAVE-J II)". Patients were divided into two groups, one receiving mechanical chest compressions and the other receiving manual chest compressions. The primary outcome measure was mortality at hospital discharge, while the secondary outcome was the cerebral performance category (CPC) score at discharge. RESULTS: Of the 2157 patients enrolled in the SAVE-J II trial, 453 patients (329 in the manual compression group and 124 in the mechanical compression group) were included in the final analysis. Univariate analysis showed a significantly higher mortality rate at hospital discharge in the mechanical compression group compared to the manual compression group (odds ratio [95% CI] = 2.32 [1.34-4.02], p = 0.0026). Multivariate analysis showed that mechanical chest compressions were an independent factor associated with increased mortality at hospital discharge (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] = 2.00 [1.11-3.58], p = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference in CPC between the two groups. CONCLUSION: For patients with out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest who require ECPR, extreme caution should be used when performing mechanical chest compressions.

Fulminant sepsis secondary to severe lung contusion from the Lund University Cardiopulmonary Assist System device.

INTRODUCTION: Portable mechanical chest compression devices have been developed to improve upon many problems of manual compression, increase patient survival, and improve neurologic outcomes. However, the use of these devices is not without risk of harm to the patient. CASE REPORT: We describe a patient who received chest compressions from a mechanical compression device after cardiac arrest and subsequently developed fulminant sepsis secondary to lung contusions and a necrotizing pulmonary infection. DISCUSSION: Although injuries from the LUCAS have been reported, we believe this is the first reported fatal complication related to direct pulmonary injury from a mechanical compression device. CONCLUSION: More investigation is needed to determine the safety and efficacy of the LUCAS especially in obese patients.

The effect of standalone audio-visual feedback devices on the quality of chest compressions during laypersons' cardiopulmonary resuscitation training: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Individual studies that investigated the effect of standalone audio-visual feedback (AVF) devices during laypersons' cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training have yielded conflicting results. This review aimed to evaluate the effect of standalone AVF devices on the quality of chest compressions during laypersons' CPR training. METHOD AND RESULT: Randomized controlled trials of simulation studies recruiting participants without actual patient CPR experience were included. The intervention evaluated was the quality of chest compressions with standalone AVF devices vs. without AVF devices. Databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Central, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, and PsycINFO, were searched from January 2010 to January 2022. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A meta-analysis alongside a narrative synthesis was used for examining the effect of standalone AVF devices.Sixteen studies were selected for this systematic review. A meta-analysis revealed an increased compression depth of 2.22 mm [95% CI (Confidence Interval), 0.88-3.55, P = 0.001] when participants performed CPR using the feedback devices. Besides, AVF devices enabled laypersons to deliver compression rates closer to the recommended range of 100-120 per min. No improvement was noted in chest recoil and hand positioning when participants used standalone AVF devices. CONCLUSION: The quality of the included studies was variable, and different standalone AVF devices were used. Standalone AVF devices were instrumental in guiding laypersons to deliver deeper compressions without compromising the quality of compression rates. However, the devices did not improve the quality of chest recoil and placement of the hands. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42020205754.

Optimal chest compression position for cardiopulmonary resuscitation determined by computed tomography image: retrospective cross-sectional analysis.

The objective of this study was to determine the height of optimal hand position for chest compression during adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) from the tip of the sternal xiphoid process (TOX) along with the relative heights of the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) and abdominal organs among the Thai population. The retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted through a review of medical records and contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography. The total of 204 Thai patients without obvious chest deformity at Ramathibodi Hospital from January to June 2018 was included as part of a multi-regional study. The heights of the level of maximal LV width (LVmax), LOVT, top of liver and stomach with respect to TOX were measured on midline sagittal image. Mean age and body mass index (BMI) were 59.5 years and 23.9 kg/m2, respectively. One hundred and one subjects (49.5%) had pulmonary diseases. Mean height of the LVmax from TOX was 37.7 mm, corresponding to 20% of the sternal length (SL) in the inspiration arm raised position (IAR). The adjusted height of LVmax from TOX in the expiration arm-down position (EAD) was 89.7 mm (48% of SL). The inter-nipple line was at 84.5 mm (45.1% of SL) from TOX on IAR. Among 178 and 109 subjects whose uppermost part of the liver and stomach were above TOX, 80.4% and 94.5% were located within the lower half of the sternum, respectively. The adjusted optimal hand position for chest compression during CPR was at approximately 89.7 mm from TOX in EAD (48% of SL). The hand position at the upper part of the lower half of the sternum is closest to the adjusted LVmax and has a better chance to avoid compression of intraabdominal organs.Trial registration This trial was retrospectively registered on 2 February 2023 in the Thai Clinical Trial Registry, identification number TCTR 20230202006.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation during hyperbaric oxygen therapy: a comprehensive review and recommendations for practice.

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) presents unique challenges due to limited access to patients in cardiac arrest (CA) and the distinct physiological conditions present during hyperbaric therapy. Despite these challenges, guidelines specifically addressing CPR during HBOT are lacking. This review aims to consolidate the available evidence and offer recommendations for clinical practice in this context. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL using the search string: "(pressure chamber OR decompression OR hyperbaric) AND (cardiac arrest OR cardiopulmonary resuscitation OR advanced life support OR ALS OR life support OR chest compression OR ventricular fibrillation OR heart arrest OR heart massage OR resuscitation)". Additionally, relevant publications and book chapters not identified through this search were included. RESULTS: The search yielded 10,223 publications, with 41 deemed relevant to the topic. Among these, 18 articles (primarily case reports) described CPR or defibrillation in 22 patients undergoing HBOT. The remaining 23 articles provided information or recommendations pertaining to CPR during HBOT. Given the unique physiological factors during HBOT, the limitations of current resuscitation guidelines are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: CPR in the context of HBOT is a rare, yet critical event requiring special considerations. Existing guidelines should be adapted to address these unique circumstances and integrated into regular training for HBOT practitioners. This review serves as a valuable contribution to the literature on "CPR under special circumstances".

Association of Real-Time Feedback and Cardiopulmonary-Resuscitation Quality Delivered by Ambulance Personnel for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

Background High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is associated with improved survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and includes chest compression depth, chest compression rate, and chest compression fraction within international guideline recommendations. Previous studies have demonstrated divergent results of real-time feedback on CPR performance and patient outcomes. This study investigated the association between emergency medical service CPR quality and real-time CPR feedback for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods and Results This study collected out-of-hospital cardiac arrest data within the Capital Region of Denmark and compared CPR quality delivered by ambulance personnel. Data were collected in 2 consecutive phases from October 2018 to February 2020. Median chest compression depth was 6.0 cm (no feedback) and 5.9 cm (real-time feedback) (P=0.852). Corresponding proportion of guideline-compliant chest compressions for depth was 16.6% and 28.7%, respectively (P<0.001). Median chest compression rate per minute was 111 and 109 (P<0.001), respectively. Corresponding guideline adherence proportion for compression rate was 65.4% compared with 80.4% (P<0.001), respectively. Chest compression fraction was 78.9% compared with 81.9% (P<0.001), respectively. The combination of guideline-compliant chest compression depth and chest compression rate simultaneously was 8.5% (no feedback) versus 18.8% (feedback) (P<0.001). Improvements were not significant for return of spontaneous circulation (odds ratio [OR], 1.08 [95% CI, 0.84-1.39]), sustained return of spontaneous circulation (OR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.77-1.31]), or survival to hospital discharge (OR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.64-1.30]). Conclusions Real-time feedback was associated with improved guideline compliance for chest compression depth, rate, and fraction but not return of spontaneous circulation, sustained return of spontaneous circulation, or survival to hospital discharge. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04152252.

Using computed tomography to evaluate proper chest compression depth for cardiopulmonary resuscitation in Thai population: A retrospective cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of cardiopulmonary resuscitation is determined by appropriate chest compression depth and rate. The American Heart Association recommended CC depth at 5-6 cm to indicate proper cardiac output during cardiac arrest. However, many studies showed the differences in the body builds between Caucasians and Asians. Therefore, this study aimed to determine heart compression fraction (HCF) in the Thai population by using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan of the chest and a mathematical model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive contrast-enhanced CT scans of the chest performed at Ramathibodi Hospital were retrospectively reviewed from January to March 2018 by two independent radiologists. Patients' characteristics, including gender, age, weight, height, and pre-existing diseases, were recorded, and the chest parameters were measured from a CT scan. The heart compression fraction (HCF) was subsequently calculated. RESULTS: Of 306 subjects, there were 139 (45.4%) males, 148 (47.4%) lung diseases and 10 (3.3%) heart diseases. Mean age and BMI were 60.4 years old and 23.8 kg/m2, respectively. Chest diameter, heart diameter, and non-cardiac soft tissue were significantly smaller in females compared to males. Mean (SD) HCF proportional with 50 mm and 60 mm depth were 38.3% (13.3%) and 50% (14.3%), respectively. There were significant differences of HCF proportional by 50 mm and 60 mm depth between men and women (33.2% vs 42.6% and 44% vs 54.9%, respectively (P<0.001)). In addition, a decrease in HCF was significantly observed among higher BMI groups. CONCLUSION: The CT scan and mathematical model showed that 38% and 50% HCF proportions were generated by 50 mm and 60 mm CC depth. HCF proportions were significantly different between genders and among BMI groups. The recommended depth of 5-6 cm is likely to provide sufficient CC depth in the population of Thailand.