AIM: The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends monitoring invasive arterial diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) when available. In intensive care unit patients, both may be available to the rescuer. The objective of this study was to compare DBP vs. ETCO2 during CPR as predictors of cardiac arrest survival. METHODS: In two models of cardiac arrest (primary ventricular fibrillation [VF] and asphyxia-associated VF), 3-month old swine received either standard AHA guideline-based CPR or patient-centric, BP-guided CPR. Mean values of DBP and ETCO2 in the final 2min before the first defibrillation attempt were compared using receiver operating characteristic curves (area under curve [AUC] analysis). The optimal DBP cut point to predict survival was derived and subsequently validated in two independent, randomly generated cohorts. RESULTS: Of 60 animals, 37 (61.7%) survived to 45min. DBP was higher in survivors than in non-survivors (40.6±1.8mmHg vs. 25.9±2.4mmHg; p<0.001), while ETCO2 was not different (30.0±1.5mmHg vs. 32.5±1.8mmHg; p=0.30). By AUC analysis, DBP was superior to ETCO2 (0.82 vs. 0.60; p=0.025) in discriminating survivors from non-survivors. The optimal DBP cut point in the derivation cohort was 34.1mmHg. In the validation cohort, this cut point demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.78, specificity of 0.81, positive predictive value of 0.64, and negative predictive value of 0.89 for survival. CONCLUSIONS: In both primary and asphyxia-associated VF porcine models of cardiac arrest, DBP discriminates survivors from non-survivors better than ETCO2. Failure to attain a DBP >34mmHg during CPR is highly predictive of non-survival.
AIM: The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends monitoring invasive arterial diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) when available. In intensive care unit patients, both may be available to the rescuer. The objective of this study was to compare DBP vs. ETCO2 during CPR as predictors of cardiac arrest survival. METHODS: In two models of cardiac arrest (primary ventricular fibrillation [VF] and asphyxia-associated VF), 3-month old swine received either standard AHA guideline-based CPR or patient-centric, BP-guided CPR. Mean values of DBP and ETCO2 in the final 2min before the first defibrillation attempt were compared using receiver operating characteristic curves (area under curve [AUC] analysis). The optimal DBP cut point to predict survival was derived and subsequently validated in two independent, randomly generated cohorts. RESULTS: Of 60 animals, 37 (61.7%) survived to 45min. DBP was higher in survivors than in non-survivors (40.6±1.8mmHg vs. 25.9±2.4mmHg; p<0.001), while ETCO2 was not different (30.0±1.5mmHg vs. 32.5±1.8mmHg; p=0.30). By AUC analysis, DBP was superior to ETCO2 (0.82 vs. 0.60; p=0.025) in discriminating survivors from non-survivors. The optimal DBP cut point in the derivation cohort was 34.1mmHg. In the validation cohort, this cut point demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.78, specificity of 0.81, positive predictive value of 0.64, and negative predictive value of 0.89 for survival. CONCLUSIONS: In both primary and asphyxia-associated VF porcine models of cardiac arrest, DBP discriminates survivors from non-survivors better than ETCO2. Failure to attain a DBP >34mmHg during CPR is highly predictive of non-survival.
Authors: Ian G Stiell; Siobhan P Brown; Graham Nichol; Sheldon Cheskes; Christian Vaillancourt; Clifton W Callaway; Laurie J Morrison; James Christenson; Tom P Aufderheide; Daniel P Davis; Cliff Free; Dave Hostler; John A Stouffer; Ahamed H Idris Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: T Ahrens; L Schallom; K Bettorf; S Ellner; G Hurt; V O'Mara; J Ludwig; W George; T Marino; W Shannon Journal: Am J Crit Care Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Stuart H Friess; Utpal Bhalala; Matthew R Maltese; Maryam Y Naim; George Bratinov; Dana Niles; Vinay M Nadkarni; Lance B Becker; Robert A Berg Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2012-11-07 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Todd J Kilbaugh; Robert M Sutton; Michael Karlsson; Magnus J Hansson; Maryam Y Naim; Ryan W Morgan; George Bratinov; Joshua W Lampe; Vinay M Nadkarni; Lance B Becker; Susan S Margulies; Robert A Berg Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Ryan W Morgan; Todd J Kilbaugh; Wesley Shoap; George Bratinov; Yuxi Lin; Ting-Chang Hsieh; Vinay M Nadkarni; Robert A Berg; Robert M Sutton Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2016-12-05 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Justin T Hamrick; Jennifer L Hamrick; Utpal Bhalala; Jillian S Armstrong; Jeong-Hoo Lee; Ewa Kulikowicz; Jennifer K Lee; Sapna R Kudchadkar; Raymond C Koehler; Elizabeth A Hunt; Donald H Shaffner Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Caitlin E O'Brien; Polan T Santos; Michael Reyes; Shawn Adams; C Danielle Hopkins; Ewa Kulikowicz; Jennifer L Hamrick; Justin T Hamrick; Jennifer K Lee; Sapna R Kudchadkar; Elizabeth A Hunt; Raymond C Koehler; Donald H Shaffner Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2019-08-04 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Ryan W Morgan; Robert M Sutton; Michael Karlsson; Andrew J Lautz; Constantine D Mavroudis; William P Landis; Yuxi Lin; Sejin Jeong; Nancy Craig; Vinay M Nadkarni; Todd J Kilbaugh; Robert A Berg Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 30.528
Authors: Julia C Slovis; Ryan W Morgan; William P Landis; Anna L Roberts; Alexandra M Marquez; Constantine D Mavroudis; Yuxi Lin; Tiffany Ko; Vinay M Nadkarni; Robert A Berg; Robert M Sutton; Todd J Kilbaugh Journal: Resusc Plus Date: 2020-11-25
Authors: Caitlin E O'Brien; Michael Reyes; Polan T Santos; Sophia E Heitmiller; Ewa Kulikowicz; Sapna R Kudchadkar; Jennifer K Lee; Elizabeth A Hunt; Raymond C Koehler; Donald H Shaffner Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2018-10-02 Impact factor: 5.501