Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Resuscitation. 2018 Jan;122:61-64. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.11.054. Epub 2017 Nov 23.

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

Author information

1
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Florida, PO Box 100186, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA. Electronic address: tbeckermd@gmail.com.
2
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3550 Terrace St, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
3
Emergency Medicine, Mt. Sinai Health System, E 101st St, New York, NY 10029, USA.
4
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, 200 Lothrop St, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.

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.

KEYWORDS:

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

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center