Literature DB >> 8018138

A comparison of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation with standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation for cardiac arrests occurring in the hospital.

T J Cohen1, B G Goldner, P C Maccaro, A P Ardito, S Trazzera, M B Cohen, S R Dibs.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated improved cardiopulmonary circulation during cardiac arrest with the use of a hand-held suction device (Ambu CardioPump) to perform active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The purpose of this study was to compare active compression-decompression with standard CPR during cardiac arrests in hospitalized patients.
METHODS: All patients over the age of 18 years who had a witnessed cardiac arrest while hospitalized at our center were enrolled in this trial; they were randomly assigned according to their medical-record numbers to receive either active compression-decompression or standard CPR. The study end points were the rates of initial resuscitation, survival at 24 hours, hospital discharge, and neurologic outcome. Compressions were performed according to the recommendations of the American Heart Association (80 to 100 compressions per minute; depth of compression, 3.8 to 5.1 cm [1.5 to 2 in.]; and 50 percent of the cycle spent in compression).
RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (45 men and 17 women) with a mean age (+/- SE) of 68 +/- 2 years were entered into the trial. Sixty-two percent of the patients who underwent active compression-decompression were initially resuscitated, as compared with 30 percent of the patients who received standard CPR (P < 0.03); 45 percent of the patients who underwent active compression-decompression survived for at least 24 hours, as compared with 9 percent of patients who underwent standard CPR (P < 0.004). Two of the 62 study patients survived to hospital discharge; both were randomly assigned to receive active compression-decompression. Neurologic outcome, as measured by the Glasgow coma score, was better with active compression-decompression (8.0 +/- 1.3) than with standard CPR (3.5 +/- 0.3; P < 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary study, we found that, as compared with standard CPR, active compression-decompression CPR improved the rate of initial resuscitation, survival at 24 hours, and neurologic outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Larger trials will be required to assess the potential benefit in terms of long-term survival.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8018138     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199312233292603

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  18 in total

1.  [Active compression-decompression resuscitation. Improved survival rate in an emergency medicine system with emergency physician assistance?].

Authors:  D Mauer; T Schneider; W Dick; D Elich; M Mauer
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  1997-07-15

2.  The effect of time on CPR and automated external defibrillator skills in the Public Access Defibrillation Trial.

Authors:  Jim Christenson; Sarah Nafziger; Scott Compton; Kris Vijayaraghavan; Brian Slater; Robert Ledingham; Judy Powell; Mary Ann McBurnie
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2007-02-14       Impact factor: 5.262

3.  Cardiopulmonary resuscitation with active compression-decompression.

Authors:  C F Weston
Journal:  Br Heart J       Date:  1995-09

Review 4.  [Mechanical resuscitation assist devices].

Authors:  M Fischer; M Breil; M Ihli; M Messelken; S Rauch; J-C Schewe
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.041

5.  Serious complications from active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Authors:  W Rabl; M Baubin; G Broinger; R Scheithauer
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.686

Review 6.  Part 7: CPR techniques and devices: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.

Authors:  Diana M Cave; Raul J Gazmuri; Charles W Otto; Vinay M Nadkarni; Adam Cheng; Steven C Brooks; Mohamud Daya; Robert M Sutton; Richard Branson; Mary Fran Hazinski
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 7. 

Authors:  J P Nolan; C D Deakin; J Soar; B W Böttiger; G Smith; M Baubin; B Dirks; V Wenzel
Journal:  Notf Rett Med       Date:  2006-02-01       Impact factor: 0.826

8.  Prolonged retention of awareness during cardiopulmonary resuscitation for asystolic cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Shailesh Bihari; Venkatakrishna Rajajee
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.210

9.  Improved chest recoil using an adhesive glove device for active compression-decompression CPR in a pediatric manikin model.

Authors:  Jai P Udassi; Sharda Udassi; Melissa A Lamb; Kenneth E Lamb; Douglas W Theriaque; Jonathan J Shuster; Arno L Zaritsky; Ikram U Haque
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2009-08-15       Impact factor: 5.262

Review 10.  In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Review.

Authors:  Lars W Andersen; Mathias J Holmberg; Katherine M Berg; Michael W Donnino; Asger Granfeldt
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2019-03-26       Impact factor: 56.272

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.