INTRODUCTION: Use of an inspiratory impedance threshold device (ITD) significantly increases coronary perfusion pressures and survival in patients ventilated with an endotracheal tube (ETT) during active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We tested the hypothesis that the ITD could lower intratracheal pressures when attached to either a facemask or ETT. METHODS: An active and sham ITD were randomly applied first to a facemask and then to an ETT during active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 13 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients in a randomized, double-blinded, prospective clinical trial. The compression-to-bag-valve ventilation ratio was 15:2. Airway pressures (surrogate for intrathoracic pressure) were measured with a pressure transducer. A sham and an active ITD were used for 1 min each in a randomized order, first on a facemask and then on an ETT. Statistical analyses were made using Friedman's and Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests. RESULTS: For the primary end point, mean +/- sd maximum negative intrathoracic pressures (mm Hg) during the decompression phase of cardiopulmonary resuscitation were -1.0 +/- 0.73 mm Hg with a sham vs. -4.6 +/- 3.7 mm Hg with an active ITD on the facemask (p = .003) and -1.3 +/- 1.3 mm Hg with a sham ITD vs. -7.3 +/- 4.5 mm Hg with an active ITD on an ETT (p = .0009). Decompression phase airway pressures with the facemask and ETT were not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an active ITD attached to a facemask or an ETT resulted in a significantly lower negative intratracheal pressure during the decompression phase of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation when compared with controls. Airway pressures with an ITD on either a facemask or ETT were similar. The ITD-facemask combination was practical and enables rapid deployment of this life-saving technology.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Use of an inspiratory impedance threshold device (ITD) significantly increases coronary perfusion pressures and survival in patients ventilated with an endotracheal tube (ETT) during active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We tested the hypothesis that the ITD could lower intratracheal pressures when attached to either a facemask or ETT. METHODS: An active and sham ITD were randomly applied first to a facemask and then to an ETT during active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 13 out-of-hospital cardiac arrestpatients in a randomized, double-blinded, prospective clinical trial. The compression-to-bag-valve ventilation ratio was 15:2. Airway pressures (surrogate for intrathoracic pressure) were measured with a pressure transducer. A sham and an active ITD were used for 1 min each in a randomized order, first on a facemask and then on an ETT. Statistical analyses were made using Friedman's and Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests. RESULTS: For the primary end point, mean +/- sd maximum negative intrathoracic pressures (mm Hg) during the decompression phase of cardiopulmonary resuscitation were -1.0 +/- 0.73 mm Hg with a sham vs. -4.6 +/- 3.7 mm Hg with an active ITD on the facemask (p = .003) and -1.3 +/- 1.3 mm Hg with a sham ITD vs. -7.3 +/- 4.5 mm Hg with an active ITD on an ETT (p = .0009). Decompression phase airway pressures with the facemask and ETT were not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an active ITD attached to a facemask or an ETT resulted in a significantly lower negative intratracheal pressure during the decompression phase of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation when compared with controls. Airway pressures with an ITD on either a facemask or ETT were similar. The ITD-facemask combination was practical and enables rapid deployment of this life-saving technology.
Authors: Tom P Aufderheide; Ralph J Frascone; Marvin A Wayne; Brian D Mahoney; Robert A Swor; Robert M Domeier; Michael L Olinger; Richard G Holcomb; David E Tupper; Demetris Yannopoulos; Keith G Lurie Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-01-22 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Diana M Cave; Raul J Gazmuri; Charles W Otto; Vinay M Nadkarni; Adam Cheng; Steven C Brooks; Mohamud Daya; Robert M Sutton; Richard Branson; Mary Fran Hazinski Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-11-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: J P Nolan; C D Deakin; J Soar; B W Böttiger; G Smith; M Baubin; B Dirks; V Wenzel Journal: Notf Rett Med Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 0.826
Authors: Ralph J Frascone; Marvin A Wayne; Robert A Swor; Brian D Mahoney; Robert M Domeier; Michael L Olinger; David E Tupper; Cindy M Setum; Nathan Burkhart; Lucinda Klann; Joshua G Salzman; Sandi S Wewerka; Demetris Yannopoulos; Keith G Lurie; Brian J O'Neil; Richard G Holcomb; Tom P Aufderheide Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2013-05-10 Impact factor: 5.262