Mechanical active compression-decompression versus standard mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A randomised haemodynamic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest study.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 34710550.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.10.026.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACD-CPR) utilises a suction cup to lift the chest-wall actively during the decompression phase (AD). We hypothesised that mechanical ACD-CPR (Intervention), with AD up to 30 mm above the sternal resting position, would generate better haemodynamic results than standard mechanical CPR (Control). This out-of-hospital adult non-traumatic cardiac arrest trial was prospective, block-randomised and non-blinded. We included intubated patients with capnography recorded during mechanical CPR. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, prisoners, and prior chest surgery. The primary endpoint was maximum tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure (p<sub>MT</sub>CO<sub>2</sub>) and secondary endpoints were oxygen saturation of cerebral tissue (SctO<sub>2</sub>), invasive arterial blood pressures and CPR-related injuries. Intervention device lifting force performance was categorised as Complete AD (≥30 Newtons) or Incomplete AD (≤10 Newtons). Haemodynamic data, analysed as one measurement for each parameter per ventilation (Observation Unit, OU) with non-linear regression statistics are reported as mean (standard deviation). A two-sided p-value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Of 221 enrolled patients, 210 were deemed eligible (Control 109, Intervention 101). The Control vs. Intervention results showed no significant differences for p<sub>MT</sub>CO<sub>2</sub>: 29(17) vs 29(18) mmHg (p = 0.86), blood pressures during compressions: 111(45) vs. 101(68) mmHg (p = 0.93) and decompressions: 21(20) vs. 18(18) mmHg (p = 0.93) or for SctO<sub>2</sub>%: 55(36) vs. 57(9) (p = 0.42). The 48 patients who received Complete AD in > 50% of their OUs had higher SctO<sub>2</sub> than Control patients: 58(11) vs. 55(36)% (p < 0.001). Mechanical ACD-CPR provided similar haemodynamic results to standard mechanical CPR. The Intervention device did not consistently provide Complete AD. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT02479152. The Haemodynamic Effects of Mechanical Standard and Active Chest Compression-decompression During Out-of-hospital CPR.
Medical subject headings
- Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
- Thoracic Wall