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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |