PURPOSE: To compare survival, oxygenation, ventilation, and hemodynamic variables achieved with chest compressions or ventilation plus chest compressions. METHODS: This randomized experimental study was conducted in the experimental department of a university hospital. Thirty infant pigs with asphyxial cardiac arrest were randomized into two groups of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR): group 1, continuous chest compressions plus non-coordinated ventilation with a mask and mechanical ventilator (inspired oxygen fraction 0.21) (VC); group 2, chest compressions only (CC). Nine minutes of basic resuscitation was performed initially in both groups, followed by advanced resuscitation. CPR was terminated on achieving return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or after 30 min of total resuscitation time without ROSC. RESULTS: Three animals (18.8%) in the VC group and 1 (7.1%) in the CC group achieved ROSC (P = 0.351). Oxygenation and ventilation during basic CPR were insufficient in both groups, though they were significantly better in the VC group than in the CC group after 9 min (PaO(2), 26 vs. 19 mmHg, P = 0.008; PaCO(2), 84 vs. 101 mmHg, P = 0.05). Cerebral saturation was higher in the VC group (61%) than in the CC group (30%) (P = 0.06). There were no significant differences in mean arterial pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Neither of the basic CPR protocols achieved adequate oxygenation and ventilation in this model of asphyxial pediatric cardiac arrest. Chest compressions plus ventilation produced better oxygenation, ventilation, and cerebral oxygenation with no negative hemodynamic effects. Survival was higher in the VC group, though the difference was not statistically significant.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare survival, oxygenation, ventilation, and hemodynamic variables achieved with chest compressions or ventilation plus chest compressions. METHODS: This randomized experimental study was conducted in the experimental department of a university hospital. Thirty infantpigs with asphyxial cardiac arrest were randomized into two groups of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR): group 1, continuous chest compressions plus non-coordinated ventilation with a mask and mechanical ventilator (inspired oxygen fraction 0.21) (VC); group 2, chest compressions only (CC). Nine minutes of basic resuscitation was performed initially in both groups, followed by advanced resuscitation. CPR was terminated on achieving return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or after 30 min of total resuscitation time without ROSC. RESULTS: Three animals (18.8%) in the VC group and 1 (7.1%) in the CC group achieved ROSC (P = 0.351). Oxygenation and ventilation during basic CPR were insufficient in both groups, though they were significantly better in the VC group than in the CC group after 9 min (PaO(2), 26 vs. 19 mmHg, P = 0.008; PaCO(2), 84 vs. 101 mmHg, P = 0.05). Cerebral saturation was higher in the VC group (61%) than in the CC group (30%) (P = 0.06). There were no significant differences in mean arterial pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Neither of the basic CPR protocols achieved adequate oxygenation and ventilation in this model of asphyxial pediatric cardiac arrest. Chest compressions plus ventilation produced better oxygenation, ventilation, and cerebral oxygenation with no negative hemodynamic effects. Survival was higher in the VC group, though the difference was not statistically significant.
Authors: J Hope Kilgannon; Alan E Jones; Nathan I Shapiro; Mark G Angelos; Barry Milcarek; Krystal Hunter; Joseph E Parrillo; Stephen Trzeciak Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-06-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gordon A Ewy; Mathias Zuercher; Ronald W Hilwig; Arthur B Sanders; Robert A Berg; Charles W Otto; Melinda M Hayes; Karl B Kern Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Marcus Eng Hock Ong; Faith Suan Peng Ng; P Anushia; Lai Peng Tham; Benjamin Sieu-Hon Leong; Victor Yeok Kein Ong; Ling Tiah; Swee Han Lim; V Anantharaman Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2008-05-27 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Michael J Kellum; Kevin W Kennedy; Richard Barney; Franz A Keilhauer; Michael Bellino; Mathias Zuercher; Gordon A Ewy Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2008-03-28 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Rafael González; Lázaro Pascual; Alexandra Sava; Sara Tolón; Javier Urbano; Jesus López-Herce Journal: World J Pediatr Date: 2017-10-20 Impact factor: 2.764
Authors: Massimo Antonelli; Marc Bonten; Jean Chastre; Giuseppe Citerio; Giorgio Conti; J Randall Curtis; Daniel De Backer; Goran Hedenstierna; Michael Joannidis; Duncan Macrae; Jordi Mancebo; Salvatore M Maggiore; Alexandre Mebazaa; Jean-Charles Preiser; Patricia Rocco; Jean-François Timsit; Jan Wernerman; Haibo Zhang Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2012-02-14 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Clemens Kill; Monika Galbas; Christian Neuhaus; Oliver Hahn; Pascal Wallot; Karl Kesper; Hinnerk Wulf; Wolfgang Dersch Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-05-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jorge López; Sarah N Fernández; Rafael González; María J Solana; Javier Urbano; Jesús López-Herce Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-09-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jorge López; Sarah N Fernández; Rafael González; María J Solana; Javier Urbano; Blanca Toledo; Jesús López-Herce Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ali Jalali; Allan F Simpao; Jorge A Gálvez; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni; Chandrasekhar Nataraj Journal: Comput Math Methods Med Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 2.238