Literature DB >> 8427438

An experimental algorithm versus standard advanced cardiac life support in a swine model of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

J J Menegazzi1, E A Davis, D M Yealy, R L Molner, K A Nicklas, G M Hosack, E A Honingford, M M Klain.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To compare an experimental algorithm with standard advanced cardiac life support in a swine model of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
DESIGN: Randomized, controlled experimental trial. SETTING/TYPE OF PARTICIPANT: Animal laboratory using swine.
INTERVENTIONS: Eighteen swine (17.8 to 23.7 kg) were sedated, intubated, anesthetized, and instrumented for monitoring of arterial and central venous pressures and ECG. Ventricular fibrillation was induced using a bipolar pacing catheter. Animals were randomized to treatment with the experimental algorithm or standard advanced cardiac life support therapy after eight minutes of untreated ventricular fibrillation. The experimental algorithm consisted of starting CPR; giving high-dose epinephrine (0.20 mg/kg), lidocaine (1.0 mg/kg), bretylium (5.0 mg/kg), and propranolol (0.5 to 1.0 mg) by peripheral IV; hyperventilating (20 to 25 breaths per minute); and delaying countershock (5 J/kg) 60 seconds after completion of drug delivery. Data were analyzed with the Student's t-test and Fisher's exact test.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcome variables were arterial and central venous pressures, return of spontaneous circulation, and one-hour survival. Hemodynamics were not different between groups during CPR. Return of spontaneous circulation occurred in seven of nine swine (77%) in the experimental algorithm group versus two of nine swine (22%) in the advanced cardiac life support group (P = .057). Four of nine swine (44%) in the experimental algorithm group survived to one hour versus none of the animals in the advanced cardiac life support group (P = .041).
CONCLUSION: In this swine model of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, animals treated with an experimental algorithm had a significant improvement in one-hour survival compared with those treated with advanced cardiac life support.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8427438     DOI: 10.1016/s0196-0644(05)80211-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Emerg Med        ISSN: 0196-0644            Impact factor:   5.721


  5 in total

1.  Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) PRIMED cardiac arrest trial methods part 2: rationale and methodology for "Analyze Later vs. Analyze Early" protocol.

Authors:  Ian G Stiell; Clif Callaway; Dan Davis; Tom Terndrup; Judy Powell; Andrea Cook; Peter J Kudenchuk; Mohamud Daya; Richard Kerber; Ahamed Idris; Laurie J Morrison; Tom Aufderheide
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2008-05-19       Impact factor: 5.262

2.  Survival increases with CPR by Emergency Medical Services before defibrillation of out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia: observations from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium.

Authors:  Steven M Bradley; Erin E Gabriel; Tom P Aufderheide; Roxy Barnes; Jim Christenson; Daniel P Davis; Ian G Stiell; Graham Nichol
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2009-12-06       Impact factor: 5.262

3.  Increasing CPR duration prior to first defibrillation does not improve return of spontaneous circulation or survival in a swine model of prolonged ventricular fibrillation.

Authors:  Jon C Rittenberger; Brian Suffoletto; David Salcido; Eric Logue; James J Menegazzi
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2008-07-11       Impact factor: 5.262

4.  Beta-blocker use and the changing epidemiology of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest rhythms.

Authors:  Scott T Youngquist; Amy H Kaji; James T Niemann
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2007-10-31       Impact factor: 5.262

Review 5.  Drug administration in animal studies of cardiac arrest does not reflect human clinical experience.

Authors:  Joshua C Reynolds; Jon C Rittenberger; James J Menegazzi
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 5.262

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.