BACKGROUND: The basic premise that frequent ventilations during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are a necessity for tissue oxygenation has recently been challenged. An inspiratory impedance threshold device (ITD) recently has also been shown to increase CPR efficiency, principally by augmenting circulation with little impact on ventilation. The optimal compression to ventilation (C/V) is not known for this new device. The purpose of this study was to compare the currently recommended C/V ratio of 5:1 with a 10:1 ratio, +/- the ITD, to optimize circulation and oxygenation during CPR. METHODS: Thirty-two adult pigs weighing 26-31 kg were randomized to CPR with varying C/V ratios +/- the ITD as follows: A = 5:1, B = 5:1+ITD, C = 10:1, D = 10:1+ITD. After 6 min of untreated ventricular fibrillation (VF), closed-chest standard CPR was performed with an automatic piston device that does not impede passive chest wall recoil, at a continuous compression rate of 100 min(-1). Synchronous breaths were given every 5 or 10 compressions during the decompression phase depending on the group. CPR was performed for 6 min and physiological variables were measured throughout the experimental protocol. RESULTS: A reduction in the frequency of ventilation from 5:1 to 10:1 resulted in significantly improved arterial and coronary perfusion pressure in a pig model of cardiac arrest. Addition of an ITD resulted in further increases in arterial and coronary perfusion pressures with both 5:1 and 10:1 C/V ratios, without compromising oxygenation. CONCLUSION: CPR efficiency can be optimized by changing the compression: ventilation ratio from 5:1 to 10:1 and with concurrent use of the inspiratory threshold device.
BACKGROUND: The basic premise that frequent ventilations during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are a necessity for tissue oxygenation has recently been challenged. An inspiratory impedance threshold device (ITD) recently has also been shown to increase CPR efficiency, principally by augmenting circulation with little impact on ventilation. The optimal compression to ventilation (C/V) is not known for this new device. The purpose of this study was to compare the currently recommended C/V ratio of 5:1 with a 10:1 ratio, +/- the ITD, to optimize circulation and oxygenation during CPR. METHODS: Thirty-two adult pigs weighing 26-31 kg were randomized to CPR with varying C/V ratios +/- the ITD as follows: A = 5:1, B = 5:1+ITD, C = 10:1, D = 10:1+ITD. After 6 min of untreated ventricular fibrillation (VF), closed-chest standard CPR was performed with an automatic piston device that does not impede passive chest wall recoil, at a continuous compression rate of 100 min(-1). Synchronous breaths were given every 5 or 10 compressions during the decompression phase depending on the group. CPR was performed for 6 min and physiological variables were measured throughout the experimental protocol. RESULTS: A reduction in the frequency of ventilation from 5:1 to 10:1 resulted in significantly improved arterial and coronary perfusion pressure in a pig model of cardiac arrest. Addition of an ITD resulted in further increases in arterial and coronary perfusion pressures with both 5:1 and 10:1 C/V ratios, without compromising oxygenation. CONCLUSION: CPR efficiency can be optimized by changing the compression: ventilation ratio from 5:1 to 10:1 and with concurrent use of the inspiratory threshold device.
Authors: Tom P Aufderheide; Carly Alexander; Charles Lick; Brent Myers; Laurie Romig; Levon Vartanian; Joseph Stothert; Scott McKnite; Tim Matsuura; Demetris Yannopoulos; Keith Lurie Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Tom P Aufderheide; Graham Nichol; Thomas D Rea; Siobhan P Brown; Brian G Leroux; Paul E Pepe; Peter J Kudenchuk; Jim Christenson; Mohamud R Daya; Paul Dorian; Clifton W Callaway; Ahamed H Idris; Douglas Andrusiek; Shannon W Stephens; David Hostler; Daniel P Davis; James V Dunford; Ronald G Pirrallo; Ian G Stiell; Catherine M Clement; Alan Craig; Lois Van Ottingham; Terri A Schmidt; Henry E Wang; Myron L Weisfeldt; Joseph P Ornato; George Sopko Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-09-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Tom P Aufderheide; Peter J Kudenchuk; Jerris R Hedges; Graham Nichol; Richard E Kerber; Paul Dorian; Daniel P Davis; Ahamed H Idris; Clifton W Callaway; Scott Emerson; Ian G Stiell; Thomas E Terndrup Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2008-05-19 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Tom P Aufderheide; Rajat Kalra; Marinos Kosmopoulos; Jason A Bartos; Demetris Yannopoulos Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2021-02-20 Impact factor: 5.691