Cargando…

Standard versus Abdominal Lifting and Compression CPR

Background. This study compared outcomes of abdominal lifting and compression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ALP-CPR) with standard CPR (STD-CPR). Materials and Methods. Patients with cardiac arrest seen from April to December 2014 were randomized to receive standard CPR or ALP-CPR performed with a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Sisen, Liu, Qing, Han, Shupeng, Zhang, Ziran, Zhang, Yan, Liu, Yahua, Li, Jing, Wang, Lixiang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5108873/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27882073
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/9416908
_version_ 1782467437907673088
author Zhang, Sisen
Liu, Qing
Han, Shupeng
Zhang, Ziran
Zhang, Yan
Liu, Yahua
Li, Jing
Wang, Lixiang
author_facet Zhang, Sisen
Liu, Qing
Han, Shupeng
Zhang, Ziran
Zhang, Yan
Liu, Yahua
Li, Jing
Wang, Lixiang
author_sort Zhang, Sisen
collection PubMed
description Background. This study compared outcomes of abdominal lifting and compression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ALP-CPR) with standard CPR (STD-CPR). Materials and Methods. Patients with cardiac arrest seen from April to December 2014 were randomized to receive standard CPR or ALP-CPR performed with a novel abdominal lifting/compression device. The primary outcome was return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Results. Patients were randomized to receive ALP-CPR (n = 40) and STD-CPR (n = 43), and the groups had similar baseline characteristics. After CPR, 9 (22.5%) and 7 (16.3%) patients in the ALP-CPR and STD-CPR groups, respectively, obtained ROSC. At 60 minutes after ROSC, 7 (77.8%) and 2 (28.6%) patients, respectively, in the ALP-CPR and STD-CPR groups survived (P = 0.049). Patients in the ALP-CPR group had a significantly higher heart rate and lower mean arterial pressure (MAP) than those in the STD-CPR group (heart rate: 106.8 versus 79.0, P < 0.001; MAP: 60.0 versus 67.3 mm Hg, P = 0.003). The posttreatment PCO(2) was significantly lower in ALP-CPR group than in STD-CPR group (52.33 versus 58.81, P = 0.009). PO(2) was significantly increased after ALP-CPR (45.15 to 60.68, P < 0.001), but it was not changed after STD-CPR. PO(2) after CPR was significantly higher in the ALP-CPR group (60.68 versus 44.47, P < 0.001). There were no differences between genders and for patients who are > 65 or ≤ 65 years of age. Conclusions. The abdominal lifting and compression cardiopulmonary resuscitation device used in this study is associated with a higher survival rate after ROSC than standard CPR.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5108873
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51088732016-11-23 Standard versus Abdominal Lifting and Compression CPR Zhang, Sisen Liu, Qing Han, Shupeng Zhang, Ziran Zhang, Yan Liu, Yahua Li, Jing Wang, Lixiang Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Research Article Background. This study compared outcomes of abdominal lifting and compression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ALP-CPR) with standard CPR (STD-CPR). Materials and Methods. Patients with cardiac arrest seen from April to December 2014 were randomized to receive standard CPR or ALP-CPR performed with a novel abdominal lifting/compression device. The primary outcome was return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Results. Patients were randomized to receive ALP-CPR (n = 40) and STD-CPR (n = 43), and the groups had similar baseline characteristics. After CPR, 9 (22.5%) and 7 (16.3%) patients in the ALP-CPR and STD-CPR groups, respectively, obtained ROSC. At 60 minutes after ROSC, 7 (77.8%) and 2 (28.6%) patients, respectively, in the ALP-CPR and STD-CPR groups survived (P = 0.049). Patients in the ALP-CPR group had a significantly higher heart rate and lower mean arterial pressure (MAP) than those in the STD-CPR group (heart rate: 106.8 versus 79.0, P < 0.001; MAP: 60.0 versus 67.3 mm Hg, P = 0.003). The posttreatment PCO(2) was significantly lower in ALP-CPR group than in STD-CPR group (52.33 versus 58.81, P = 0.009). PO(2) was significantly increased after ALP-CPR (45.15 to 60.68, P < 0.001), but it was not changed after STD-CPR. PO(2) after CPR was significantly higher in the ALP-CPR group (60.68 versus 44.47, P < 0.001). There were no differences between genders and for patients who are > 65 or ≤ 65 years of age. Conclusions. The abdominal lifting and compression cardiopulmonary resuscitation device used in this study is associated with a higher survival rate after ROSC than standard CPR. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2016-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5108873/ /pubmed/27882073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/9416908 Text en Copyright © 2016 Sisen Zhang et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zhang, Sisen
Liu, Qing
Han, Shupeng
Zhang, Ziran
Zhang, Yan
Liu, Yahua
Li, Jing
Wang, Lixiang
Standard versus Abdominal Lifting and Compression CPR
title Standard versus Abdominal Lifting and Compression CPR
title_full Standard versus Abdominal Lifting and Compression CPR
title_fullStr Standard versus Abdominal Lifting and Compression CPR
title_full_unstemmed Standard versus Abdominal Lifting and Compression CPR
title_short Standard versus Abdominal Lifting and Compression CPR
title_sort standard versus abdominal lifting and compression cpr
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5108873/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27882073
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/9416908
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangsisen standardversusabdominalliftingandcompressioncpr
AT liuqing standardversusabdominalliftingandcompressioncpr
AT hanshupeng standardversusabdominalliftingandcompressioncpr
AT zhangziran standardversusabdominalliftingandcompressioncpr
AT zhangyan standardversusabdominalliftingandcompressioncpr
AT liuyahua standardversusabdominalliftingandcompressioncpr
AT lijing standardversusabdominalliftingandcompressioncpr
AT wanglixiang standardversusabdominalliftingandcompressioncpr