Justin T Hamrick1, 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. 1. 1Department of Pediatric Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Arkansas Children's Hospital, Little Rock, AR. 2Department of Pediatrics, Division of Critical Care Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, The Children's Hospital of San Antonio, San Antonio, TX. 3Department of Anesthesiology/Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. 4Department of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. 5Division of Health Sciences Informatics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether end-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery improves survival over standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation after prolonged asphyxial arrest. DESIGN: Preclinical randomized controlled study. SETTING: University animal research laboratory. SUBJECTS: 1-2-week-old swine. INTERVENTIONS: After undergoing a 20-minute asphyxial arrest, animals received either standard or end-tidal CO2-guided cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In the standard group, chest compression delivery was optimized by video and verbal feedback to maintain the rate, depth, and release within published guidelines. In the end-tidal CO2-guided group, chest compression rate and depth were adjusted to obtain a maximal end-tidal CO2 level without other feedback. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation included 10 minutes of basic life support followed by advanced life support for 10 minutes or until return of spontaneous circulation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mean end-tidal CO2 at 10 minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 34 ± 8 torr in the end-tidal CO2 group (n = 14) and 19 ± 9 torr in the standard group (n = 14; p = 0.0001). The return of spontaneous circulation rate was 7 of 14 (50%) in the end-tidal CO2 group and 2 of 14 (14%) in the standard group (p = 0.04). The chest compression rate averaged 143 ± 10/min in the end-tidal CO2 group and 102 ± 2/min in the standard group (p < 0.0001). Neither asphyxia-related hypercarbia nor epinephrine administration confounded the use of end-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery. The response of the relaxation arterial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressure to the initial epinephrine administration was greater in the end-tidal CO2 group than in the standard group (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03, respectively). The prevalence of resuscitation-related injuries was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: End-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery is an effective resuscitation method that improves early survival after prolonged asphyxial arrest in this neonatal piglet model. Optimizing end-tidal CO2 levels during cardiopulmonary resuscitation required that chest compression delivery rate exceed current guidelines. The use of physiologic feedback during cardiopulmonary resuscitation has the potential to provide optimized and individualized resuscitative efforts.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether end-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery improves survival over standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation after prolonged asphyxial arrest. DESIGN: Preclinical randomized controlled study. SETTING: University animal research laboratory. SUBJECTS: 1-2-week-old swine. INTERVENTIONS: After undergoing a 20-minute asphyxial arrest, animals received either standard or end-tidal CO2-guided cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In the standard group, chest compression delivery was optimized by video and verbal feedback to maintain the rate, depth, and release within published guidelines. In the end-tidal CO2-guided group, chest compression rate and depth were adjusted to obtain a maximal end-tidal CO2 level without other feedback. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation included 10 minutes of basic life support followed by advanced life support for 10 minutes or until return of spontaneous circulation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mean end-tidal CO2 at 10 minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 34 ± 8 torr in the end-tidal CO2 group (n = 14) and 19 ± 9 torr in the standard group (n = 14; p = 0.0001). The return of spontaneous circulation rate was 7 of 14 (50%) in the end-tidal CO2 group and 2 of 14 (14%) in the standard group (p = 0.04). The chest compression rate averaged 143 ± 10/min in the end-tidal CO2 group and 102 ± 2/min in the standard group (p < 0.0001). Neither asphyxia-related hypercarbia nor epinephrine administration confounded the use of end-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery. The response of the relaxation arterial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressure to the initial epinephrine administration was greater in the end-tidal CO2 group than in the standard group (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03, respectively). The prevalence of resuscitation-related injuries was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: End-tidal CO2-guided chest compression delivery is an effective resuscitation method that improves early survival after prolonged asphyxial arrest in this neonatal piglet model. Optimizing end-tidal CO2 levels during cardiopulmonary resuscitation required that chest compression delivery rate exceed current guidelines. The use of physiologic feedback during cardiopulmonary resuscitation has the potential to provide optimized and individualized resuscitative efforts.
Authors: Allan R de Caen; Ian K Maconochie; Richard Aickin; Dianne L Atkins; Dominique Biarent; Anne-Marie Guerguerian; Monica E Kleinman; David A Kloeck; Peter A Meaney; Vinay M Nadkarni; Kee-Chong Ng; Gabrielle Nuthall; Amelia G Reis; Naoki Shimizu; James Tibballs; Remigio Veliz Pintos Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 29.690
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: Jennifer L Hamrick; Justin T Hamrick; Caitlin E O'Brien; Michael Reyes; Polan T Santos; Sophie E Heitmiller; Ewa Kulikowicz; Jennifer K Lee; Sapna R Kudchadkar; Raymond C Koehler; Elizabeth A Hunt; Donald H Shaffner Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2019-07 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: Robert M Sutton; Heather A Wolfe; Ron W Reeder; Tageldin Ahmed; Robert Bishop; Matthew Bochkoris; Candice Burns; J Wesley Diddle; Myke Federman; Richard Fernandez; Deborah Franzon; Aisha H Frazier; Stuart H Friess; Kathryn Graham; David Hehir; Christopher M Horvat; Leanna L Huard; William P Landis; Tensing Maa; Arushi Manga; Ryan W Morgan; Vinay M Nadkarni; Maryam Y Naim; Chella A Palmer; Carleen Schneiter; Matthew P Sharron; Ashley Siems; Neeraj Srivastava; Sarah Tabbutt; Bradley Tilford; Shirley Viteri; Robert A Berg; Michael J Bell; Joseph A Carcillo; Todd C Carpenter; J Michael Dean; Ericka L Fink; Mark Hall; Patrick S McQuillen; Kathleen L Meert; Peter M Mourani; Daniel Notterman; Murray M Pollack; Anil Sapru; David Wessel; Andrew R Yates; Athena F Zuppa Journal: JAMA Date: 2022-03-08 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Jennifer K Lee; Polan T Santos; May W Chen; Caitlin E O'Brien; Ewa Kulikowicz; Shawn Adams; Henry Hardart; Raymond C Koehler; Lee J Martin Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2021-01-20 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Francis M Lapid; Caitlin E O'Brien; Sapna R Kudchadkar; Jennifer K Lee; Elizabeth A Hunt; Raymond C Koehler; Donald H Shaffner Journal: Paediatr Anaesth Date: 2020-01-27 Impact factor: 2.556
Authors: Ryan W Morgan; Matthew P Kirschen; Todd J Kilbaugh; Robert M Sutton; Alexis A Topjian Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: Lukas Peter Mileder; Nicholas Mark Morris; Stefan Kurath-Koller; Jasmin Pansy; Gerhard Pichler; Mirjam Pocivalnik; Bernhard Schwaberger; Ante Burmas; Berndt Urlesberger Journal: Children (Basel) Date: 2021-05-20