Literature DB >> 22562057

Correlation between coronary perfusion pressure and quantitative ECG waveform measures during resuscitation of prolonged ventricular fibrillation.

Joshua C Reynolds1, David D Salcido, James J Menegazzi.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The ventricular fibrillation (VF) waveform is dynamic and predicts defibrillation success. Quantitative waveform measures (QWMs) quantify these changes. Coronary perfusion pressure (CPP), a surrogate for myocardial perfusion, also predicts defibrillation success. The relationship between QWM and CPP has been preliminarily explored. We sought to further delineate this relationship in our porcine model and to determine if it is different between animals with/without ROSC (return of spontaneous circulation). HYPOTHESIS: A relationship exists between QWM and CPP that is different between animals with/without ROSC.
METHODS: Utilizing a prior experiment in our porcine model of prolonged out-of-hospital VF cardiac arrest, we calculated mean CPP, cumulative dose CPP, and percent recovery of three QWM during resuscitation before the first defibrillation: amplitude spectrum area (AMSA), median slope (MS), and logarithm of the absolute correlations (LAC). A random effects linear regression model with an interaction term CPP ROSC investigated the association between CPP and percent recovery QWM and how this relationship changes with/without ROSC.
RESULTS: For 12 animals, CPP and QWM measures (except LAC) improved during resuscitation. A linear relationship existed between CPP and percent recovery AMSA (coefficient 0.27; 95%CI 0.23, 0.31; p<0.001) and percent recovery MS (coefficient 0.80; 95%CI 0.70, 0.90; p<0.001). A linear relationship existed between cumulative dose CPP and percent recovery AMSA (coefficient 2.29; 95%CI 2.0, 2.56; p<0.001) and percent recovery MS (coefficient 6.68; 95%CI 6.09, 7.26; p<0.001). Animals with ROSC had a significantly "steeper" dose-response relationship.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a linear relationship between QWM and CPP during chest compressions in our porcine cardiac arrest model that is different between animals with/without ROSC.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22562057      PMCID: PMC3443288          DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.04.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Resuscitation        ISSN: 0300-9572            Impact factor:   5.262


  37 in total

1.  Resuscitation after cardiac arrest: a 3-phase time-sensitive model.

Authors:  Myron L Weisfeldt; Lance B Becker
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-12-18       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Immediate countershock versus cardiopulmonary resuscitation before countershock in a 5-minute swine model of ventricular fibrillation arrest.

Authors:  J T Niemann; B Cruz; D Garner; R J Lewis
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 5.721

3.  Optimizing timing of ventricular defibrillation.

Authors:  A Marn-Pernat; M H Weil; W Tang; A Pernat; J Bisera
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 7.598

4.  Conceptual models of coronary perfusion pressure and their relationship to defibrillation success in a porcine model of prolonged out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Joshua C Reynolds; David D Salcido; James J Menegazzi
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 5.262

5.  Relative lack of coronary blood flow during closed-chest resuscitation in dogs.

Authors:  R V Ditchey; J V Winkler; C A Rhodes
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  New versus old theories of blood flow during CPR.

Authors:  C F Babbs
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 7.598

7.  Amplitude spectrum area: measuring the probability of successful defibrillation as applied to human data.

Authors:  Clayton Young; Joe Bisera; Stacy Gehman; David Snyder; Wanchun Tang; Max Harry Weil
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Predicting the success of defibrillation by electrocardiographic analysis.

Authors:  Heitor P Povoas; Max Harry Weil; Wanchun Tang; Joe Bisera; Kada Klouche; Ann Barbatsis
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 5.262

9.  Precountershock cardiopulmonary resuscitation improves initial response to defibrillation from prolonged ventricular fibrillation: a randomized, controlled swine study.

Authors:  Robert A Berg; Ronald W Hilwig; Gordon A Ewy; Karl B Kern
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 7.598

10.  Delaying defibrillation to give basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation to patients with out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Lars Wik; Trond Boye Hansen; Frode Fylling; Thorbjørn Steen; Per Vaagenes; Bjørn H Auestad; Petter Andreas Steen
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-03-19       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  13 in total

1.  Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) versus standard CPR for cardiac arrest patients: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xu-Rui Luo; Hui-Li Zhang; Geng-Jin Chen; Wen-Shu Ding; Liang Huang
Journal:  World J Emerg Med       Date:  2013

2.  Predictive value of amplitude spectrum area of ventricular fibrillation waveform in patients with acute or previous myocardial infarction in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Michiel Hulleman; David D Salcido; James J Menegazzi; Patrick C Souverein; Hanno L Tan; Marieke T Blom; Rudolph W Koster
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 5.262

3.  Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest resuscitation in a porcine model of ventricular fibrillation.

Authors:  Joshua C Reynolds; David D Salcido; Matthew L Sundermann; Allison C Koller; James J Menegazzi
Journal:  J Extra Corpor Technol       Date:  2013-03

Review 4.  Enhancing cardiac arrest survival with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: insights into the process of death.

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

5.  Repeated epinephrine doses during prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation have limited effects on myocardial blood flow: a randomized porcine study.

Authors:  Henrik Wagner; Michael Götberg; Bjarne Madsen Hardig; Malin Rundgren; Jonas Carlson; Matthias Götberg; David Zughaft; David Erlinge; Göran K Olivecrona
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2014-12-20       Impact factor: 2.298

6.  Combining Amplitude Spectrum Area with Previous Shock Information Using Neural Networks Improves Prediction Performance of Defibrillation Outcome for Subsequent Shocks in Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients.

Authors:  Mi He; Yubao Lu; Lei Zhang; Hehua Zhang; Yushun Gong; Yongqin Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Ventricular Fibrillation Waveform Changes during Controlled Coronary Perfusion Using Extracorporeal Circulation in a Swine Model.

Authors:  Raúl J Gazmuri; Christopher L Kaufman; Alvin Baetiong; Jeejabai Radhakrishnan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Predict Defibrillation Outcome Using Stepping Increment of Poincare Plot for Out-of-Hospital Ventricular Fibrillation Cardiac Arrest.

Authors:  Yushun Gong; Yubao Lu; Lei Zhang; Hehua Zhang; Yongqin Li
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  Integration of Attributes from Non-Linear Characterization of Cardiovascular Time-Series for Prediction of Defibrillation Outcomes.

Authors:  Sharad Shandilya; Michael C Kurz; Kevin R Ward; Kayvan Najarian
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Real-Time Ventricular Fibrillation Amplitude-Spectral Area Analysis to Guide Timing of Shock Delivery Improves Defibrillation Efficacy During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Swine.

Authors:  Salvatore Aiello; Michelle Perez; Chad Cogan; Alvin Baetiong; Steven A Miller; Jeejabai Radhakrishnan; Christopher L Kaufman; Raúl J Gazmuri
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2017-11-04       Impact factor: 5.501

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.