Survival and neurologic outcome after cardiopulmonary resuscitation with four different chest compression-ventilation ratios
- PMID: 12447330
- DOI: 10.1067/mem.2002.129507
Survival and neurologic outcome after cardiopulmonary resuscitation with four different chest compression-ventilation ratios
Abstract
Study objective: The optimal ratio of chest compressions to ventilations during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is unknown. We determine 24-hour survival and neurologic outcome, comparing 4 different chest compression-ventilation CPR ratios in a porcine model of prolonged cardiac arrest and bystander CPR.
Methods: Forty swine were instrumented and subjected to 3 minutes of ventricular fibrillation followed by 12 minutes of CPR by using 1 of 4 models of chest compression-ventilation ratios as follows: (1) standard CPR with a ratio of 15:2; (2) CC-CPR, chest compressions only with no ventilations for 12 minutes; (3) 50:5-CPR, CPR with a ratio of 50:5 compressions to ventilations, as advocated by authorities in Great Britain; and (4) 100:2-CPR, 4 minutes of chest compressions only followed by CPR with a ratio of 100:2 compressions to ventilations. CPR was followed by standard advanced cardiac life support, 1 hour of critical care, and 24 hours of observation, followed by a neurologic evaluation.
Results: There were no statistically significant differences in 24-hour survival among the 4 groups (standard CPR, 7/10; CC-CPR, 7/10; 50:5-CPR, 8/10; 100:2-CPR, 9/10). There were significant differences in 24-hour neurologic function, as evaluated by using the swine cerebral performance category scale. The animals receiving 100:2-CPR had significantly better neurologic function at 24 hours than the standard CPR group with a 15:2 ratio (1.5 versus 2.5; P =.007). The 100:2-CPR group also had better neurologic function than the CC-CPR group, which received chest compressions with no ventilations (1.5 versus 2.3; P =.027). Coronary perfusion pressures, aortic pressures, and myocardial and kidney blood flows were not significantly different among the groups. Coronary perfusion pressure as an integrated area under the curve was significantly better in the CC-CPR group than in the standard CPR group (P =.04). Minute ventilation and PaO (2) were significantly lower in the CC-CPR group.
Conclusion: In this experimental model of bystander CPR, the group receiving compressions only for 4 minutes followed by a compression-ventilation ratio of 100:2 achieved better neurologic outcome than the group receiving standard CPR and CC-CPR. Consideration of alternative chest compression-ventilation ratios might be appropriate.
Comment in
-
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation, ventilation, defibrillation: in what order?Ann Emerg Med. 2002 Dec;40(6):571-4. doi: 10.1067/mem.2002.130130. Ann Emerg Med. 2002. PMID: 12447332 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Improved neurological outcome with continuous chest compressions compared with 30:2 compressions-to-ventilations cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a realistic swine model of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Circulation. 2007 Nov 27;116(22):2525-30. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.711820. Epub 2007 Nov 12. Circulation. 2007. PMID: 17998457
-
Simulated mouth-to-mouth ventilation and chest compressions (bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation) improves outcome in a swine model of prehospital pediatric asphyxial cardiac arrest.Crit Care Med. 1999 Sep;27(9):1893-9. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199909000-00030. Crit Care Med. 1999. PMID: 10507615
-
3:1 compression to ventilation ratio versus continuous chest compression with asynchronous ventilation in a porcine model of neonatal resuscitation.Resuscitation. 2014 Feb;85(2):270-5. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2013.10.011. Epub 2013 Oct 22. Resuscitation. 2014. PMID: 24161768
-
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation without ventilation.Crit Care Med. 2000 Nov;28(11 Suppl):N186-9. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200011001-00003. Crit Care Med. 2000. PMID: 11098942 Review.
-
[New mechanical methods for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Literature study and analysis of effectiveness].Anaesthesist. 1997 Mar;46(3):220-30. doi: 10.1007/s001010050395. Anaesthesist. 1997. PMID: 9163267 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Pediatric basic and advanced life support: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations.Pediatrics. 2010 Nov;126(5):e1261-318. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-2972A. Epub 2010 Oct 18. Pediatrics. 2010. PMID: 20956433 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
A review of ventilation in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2020 Apr 28;1(3):190-201. doi: 10.1002/emp2.12065. eCollection 2020 Jun. J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2020. PMID: 33000034 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Chest compressions and epinephrine during resuscitation of infants born at the border of viability: Yes, no or maybe?Paediatr Child Health. 2011 Feb;16(2):87-90. doi: 10.1093/pch/16.2.87. Paediatr Child Health. 2011. PMID: 22294868 Free PMC article.
-
[Adult basic life support and automated external defibrillation.].Notf Rett Med. 2015;18(8):748-769. doi: 10.1007/s10049-015-0081-1. Epub 2015 Nov 9. Notf Rett Med. 2015. PMID: 32214896 Free PMC article. German. No abstract available.
-
Standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus chest compressions only after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ Open. 2024 May 9;14(5):e079167. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079167. BMJ Open. 2024. PMID: 38724047 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical