Outcomes after mechanical versus manual chest compressions in eCPR patients

Abstract

Background: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) is an established treatment option for cardiac arrest. Mechanical reanimation devices are increasingly used but have been associated with complications. This study evaluates typical injury patterns and differences after mechanical versus manual chest compressions among patients undergoing eCPR.

Methods: From 2016 to 2020, 108 eCPR patients were retrospectively analyzed. Primary endpoints were traumatic, hemorrhagic, or inner organ-related complications, defined as pneumothorax, pulmonary bleeding, major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, gastrointestinal ischemia, cardiac tamponade, aortic dissection, sternal or rib fracture.

Results: 70 patients were treated with mechanical CPR (mCPR) and 38 with conventional CPR (cCPR). There were more CPR-related injuries in the mCPR group (55% vs. 83%, p = 0.01), CPR duration was longer (cCPR 40 ± 28 min vs. mCPR 69 ± 25 min, p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in mortality between the groups.

Conclusion: Mechanical CPR devices are associated with a higher incidence of traumatic and hemorrhagic injuries in patients undergoing eCPR.

Keywords: CPR; ecmo; ecpr; lucas; resuscitation.