Cargando…

Meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

BACKGROUND: According to the guidelines of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) conducted by bystanders, two methods of CPR are feasible: standard CPR (sCPR) with mouth-to-mouth ventilations and continuous chest compression-only CPR (CCC) without rescue breathing. The goal herein, was to evaluate the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bielski, Karol, Smereka, Jacek, Chmielewski, Jaroslaw, Pruc, Michal, Chirico, Francesco, Gasecka, Aleksandra, Litvinova, Nataliia, Jaguszewski, Milosz J., Nowak-Starz, Grazyna, afique, Zubaid R, Peacock, Frank W., Szarpak, Lukasz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Via Medica 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10508072/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34622436
http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0115
_version_ 1785107452066267136
author Bielski, Karol
Smereka, Jacek
Chmielewski, Jaroslaw
Pruc, Michal
Chirico, Francesco
Gasecka, Aleksandra
Litvinova, Nataliia
Jaguszewski, Milosz J.
Nowak-Starz, Grazyna
afique, Zubaid R
Peacock, Frank W.
Szarpak, Lukasz
author_facet Bielski, Karol
Smereka, Jacek
Chmielewski, Jaroslaw
Pruc, Michal
Chirico, Francesco
Gasecka, Aleksandra
Litvinova, Nataliia
Jaguszewski, Milosz J.
Nowak-Starz, Grazyna
afique, Zubaid R
Peacock, Frank W.
Szarpak, Lukasz
author_sort Bielski, Karol
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: According to the guidelines of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) conducted by bystanders, two methods of CPR are feasible: standard CPR (sCPR) with mouth-to-mouth ventilations and continuous chest compression-only CPR (CCC) without rescue breathing. The goal herein, was to evaluate the effect of sCPR (30:2) and CCC on resuscitation outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. METHODS: This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis. Using standardized criteria, Pub- Med, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE and Cochrane Collaboration were searched for trials assessing the effect of sCPR vs. CCC on resuscitation outcomes after adult OHCA. Random-effects model meta-analysis was applied to calculate the mean deviation (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Overall, 3 randomized controlled trials and 12 non-randomized trials met the inclusion criteria. Survival to hospital discharge with sCPR was 10.2% compared to 9.3% in the CCC group (OR = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.93–1.16; p = 0.46). Survival to hospital discharge with good neurological outcome measured with the cerebral performance category (CPC 1 or 2) was 6.5% for sCPR vs. 5.8% for CCC (OR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.84–1.20; p = 0.98). Prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in sCPR and CCC groups was 15.9% and 14.8%, respectively (OR = 1.13; 95% CI: 0.91–1.39; p = 0.26). Survival to hospital admission with ROSC occurred in 29.5% of the sCPR group compared to 28.4% in CCC group (OR = 1.20; 95% CI: 0.89–1.63; p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that there were no significant differences in the resuscitation outcomes between the use of standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation and chest compression only.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10508072
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Via Medica
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105080722023-09-20 Meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest Bielski, Karol Smereka, Jacek Chmielewski, Jaroslaw Pruc, Michal Chirico, Francesco Gasecka, Aleksandra Litvinova, Nataliia Jaguszewski, Milosz J. Nowak-Starz, Grazyna afique, Zubaid R Peacock, Frank W. Szarpak, Lukasz Cardiol J Clinical Cardiology BACKGROUND: According to the guidelines of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) conducted by bystanders, two methods of CPR are feasible: standard CPR (sCPR) with mouth-to-mouth ventilations and continuous chest compression-only CPR (CCC) without rescue breathing. The goal herein, was to evaluate the effect of sCPR (30:2) and CCC on resuscitation outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. METHODS: This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis. Using standardized criteria, Pub- Med, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE and Cochrane Collaboration were searched for trials assessing the effect of sCPR vs. CCC on resuscitation outcomes after adult OHCA. Random-effects model meta-analysis was applied to calculate the mean deviation (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Overall, 3 randomized controlled trials and 12 non-randomized trials met the inclusion criteria. Survival to hospital discharge with sCPR was 10.2% compared to 9.3% in the CCC group (OR = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.93–1.16; p = 0.46). Survival to hospital discharge with good neurological outcome measured with the cerebral performance category (CPC 1 or 2) was 6.5% for sCPR vs. 5.8% for CCC (OR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.84–1.20; p = 0.98). Prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in sCPR and CCC groups was 15.9% and 14.8%, respectively (OR = 1.13; 95% CI: 0.91–1.39; p = 0.26). Survival to hospital admission with ROSC occurred in 29.5% of the sCPR group compared to 28.4% in CCC group (OR = 1.20; 95% CI: 0.89–1.63; p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that there were no significant differences in the resuscitation outcomes between the use of standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation and chest compression only. Via Medica 2023-08-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10508072/ /pubmed/34622436 http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0115 Text en Copyright © 2023 Via Medica https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is available in open access under Creative Common Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, allowing to download articles and share them with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially
spellingShingle Clinical Cardiology
Bielski, Karol
Smereka, Jacek
Chmielewski, Jaroslaw
Pruc, Michal
Chirico, Francesco
Gasecka, Aleksandra
Litvinova, Nataliia
Jaguszewski, Milosz J.
Nowak-Starz, Grazyna
afique, Zubaid R
Peacock, Frank W.
Szarpak, Lukasz
Meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
title Meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
title_full Meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
title_fullStr Meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
title_full_unstemmed Meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
title_short Meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
title_sort meta-analysis of chest compression-only versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for adult with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
topic Clinical Cardiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10508072/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34622436
http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0115
work_keys_str_mv AT bielskikarol metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT smerekajacek metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT chmielewskijaroslaw metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT prucmichal metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT chiricofrancesco metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT gaseckaaleksandra metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT litvinovanataliia metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT jaguszewskimiloszj metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT nowakstarzgrazyna metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT afiquezubaidr metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT peacockfrankw metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest
AT szarpaklukasz metaanalysisofchestcompressiononlyversusconventionalcardiopulmonaryresuscitationbybystandersforadultwithoutofhospitalcardiacarrest