Literature DB >> 29175355

An assessment of ventilation and perfusion markers in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients receiving mechanical CPR with endotracheal or supraglottic airways.

Torben K Becker1, Aric W Berning2, Arjun Prabhu3, Clifton W Callaway4, Francis X Guyette4, Christian Martin-Gill4.   

Abstract

AIM OF THE STUDY: Mechanical chest compression (MCPR) devices are considered equivalent to manual compressions in patient outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). However, recent data suggest possible harm in patients with a supraglottic airway device (SGA) during MCPR. The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in direct and indirect markers of ventilation and perfusion in patients with cardiac arrest receiving MCPR and who had their airway managed with an endotracheal tube (ETT) or SGA.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies and emergency department (ED) records over a two-year period. We included patients with OHCA who underwent MCPR and who had an advanced airway placed. The primary outcome was differences in intra-arrest end-tidal carbon dioxide (etCO2) measurements. Secondary outcomes included intra-arrest ventilation rates, rates of prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), blood pressure upon prehospital ROSC, and 24-h survival.
RESULTS: Valid data sets were available for 126 patients. Eighty-four (66.7%) had an ETT placed, and 42 (33.3%) had a SGA placed. Twenty-eight (22.6%) achieved prehospital ROSC. Twenty-four-hour survival data were available for 13 (10.3%) of these patients. There were no significant differences in primary or secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, we found no evidence of differences in markers of ventilation, perfusion or prehospital ROSC and survival in patients with OHCA who had their airway managed with either an ETT or SGA while receiving MCPR.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Airway management; Cardiopulmonary resuscitation; Emergency medical services; Intubation, intratracheal; Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29175355     DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.11.054

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


  3 in total

1.  [Supraglottic airway devices and intraosseous access in the treatment of patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest : Do we use the wrong tool too often?]

Authors:  M Christ; K I von Auenmüller; T von den Benken; S Fessaras; W Dierschke; H-J Trappe
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 0.840

2.  Out-of-hospital endotracheal intubation experience, confidence and confidence-associated factors among Northern Japanese emergency life-saving technicians: a population-based cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Yuko Ono; Koichi Tanigawa; Takeyasu Kakamu; Kazuaki Shinohara; Ken Iseki
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-07-13       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Comparison of i-Gel as a Conduit for Intubation between under Fiberoptic Guidance and Blind Endotracheal Intubation during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Simulation Study.

Authors:  Hyun Young Choi; Wonhee Kim; Yong Soo Jang; Gu Hyun Kang; Jae Guk Kim; Hyeongtae Kim
Journal:  Emerg Med Int       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 1.112

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.