64
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Adverse Hemodynamic Effects of Interrupting Chest Compressions for Rescue Breathing During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Ventricular Fibrillation Cardiac Arrest

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Despite improving arterial oxygen saturation and pH, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with chest compressions plus rescue breathing (CC+RB) has not improved survival from ventricular fibrillation (VF) compared with chest compressions alone (CC) in numerous animal models and 2 clinical investigations. After 3 minutes of untreated VF, 14 swine (32+/-1 kg) were randomly assigned to receive CC+RB or CC for 12 minutes, followed by advanced cardiac life support. All 14 animals survived 24 hours, 13 with good neurological outcome. For the CC+RB group, the aortic relaxation pressures routinely decreased during the 2 rescue breaths. Therefore, the mean coronary perfusion pressure of the first 2 compressions in each compression cycle was lower than those of the final 2 compressions (14+/-1 versus 21+/-2 mm Hg, P<0.001). During each minute of CPR, the number of chest compressions was also lower in the CC+RB group (62+/-1 versus 92+/-1 compressions, P<0.001). Consequently, the integrated coronary perfusion pressure was lower with CC+RB during each minute of CPR (P<0.05 for the first 8 minutes). Moreover, at 2 to 5 minutes of CPR, the median left ventricular blood flow by fluorescent microsphere technique was 60 mL. 100 g(-1). min(-1) with CC+RB versus 96 mL. 100 g(-1). min(-1) with CC, P<0.05. Because the arterial oxygen saturation was higher with CC+RB, the left ventricular myocardial oxygen delivery did not differ. Interrupting chest compressions for rescue breathing can adversely affect hemodynamics during CPR for VF.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cardiopulmonary resuscitation by chest compression alone or with mouth-to-mouth ventilation.

          Despite extensive training of citizens of Seattle in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), bystanders do not perform CPR in almost half of witnessed cardiac arrests. Instructions in chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation given by dispatchers over the telephone can require 2.4 minutes. In experimental studies, chest compression alone is associated with survival rates similar to those with chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation. We conducted a randomized study to compare CPR by chest compression alone with CPR by chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation. The setting of the trial was an urban, fire-department-based, emergency-medical-care system with central dispatching. In a randomized manner, telephone dispatchers gave bystanders at the scene of apparent cardiac arrest instructions in either chest compression alone or chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation. The primary end point was survival to hospital discharge. Data were analyzed for 241 patients randomly assigned to receive chest compression alone and 279 assigned to chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation. Complete instructions were delivered in 62 percent of episodes for the group receiving chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation and 81 percent of episodes for the group receiving chest compression alone (P=0.005). Instructions for compression required 1.4 minutes less to complete than instructions for compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation. Survival to hospital discharge was better among patients assigned to chest compression alone than among those assigned to chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation (14.6 percent vs. 10.4 percent), but the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.18). The outcome after CPR with chest compression alone is similar to that after chest compression with mouth-to-mouth ventilation, and chest compression alone may be the preferred approach for bystanders inexperienced in CPR.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Quality and efficiency of bystander CPR

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Efficacy of chest compression-only BLS CPR in the presence of an occluded airway.

              Reluctance of the lay public to perform bystander CPR is becoming an increasingly worrisome problem in the USA. Most bystanders who admit such reluctance concede that fear of contagious disease from mouth-to-mouth contact is what keeps them from performing basic life support. Animal models of prehospital cardiac arrest indicates that 24-h survival is essentially as good with chest compression-only CPR as with chest compressions and assisted ventilation. This simpler technique is an attractive alternative strategy for encouraging more bystander participation. Such experimental studies have been criticized as irrelevant however secondary to differences between human and porcine airway mechanics. This study examined the effect of chest compression-only CPR under the worst possible circumstances where the airway was totally occluded. After 6 min of either standard CPR including ventilation with a patent airway or chest compressions-only with a totally occluded airway, no difference in 24 h survival was found (10/10 vs. 9/10). As anticipated arterial blood gases were not as good, but hemodynamics produced were better with chest compression-only CPR (P < 0.05). Chest compression-only CPR, even with a totally occluded airway, is as good as standard CPR for successful outcome following 6.5 min of cardiac arrest. Such a strategy for the first minutes of cardiac arrest, particularly before professional help arrives, has several advantages including increased acceptability to the lay public.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Circulation
                Circulation
                Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
                0009-7322
                1524-4539
                November 13 2001
                November 13 2001
                : 104
                : 20
                : 2465-2470
                Affiliations
                [1 ]From the University of Arizona College of Medicine, Steele Memorial Children’s Research Center and Department of Pediatrics (R.A.B.), Sarver Heart Center (all authors), Department of Surgery (A.B.S.), and Department of Medicine (K.B.K., G.A.E.), Tucson, Ariz.
                Article
                10.1161/hc4501.098926
                11705826
                b4e3827e-cc3c-4675-a482-fe1e9ded0a0b
                © 2001
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content2,135

                Cited by101

                Most referenced authors131