Cargando…

Not Bad: Passive Leg Raising in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-A New Modeling Study

Aim: To evaluate, using a simulated haemodynamic circulation model, whether passive leg raising (PLR) is able to improve the effect during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR); to expose the possible reasons why PLR works or not. Materials and Methods: We adapted a circulatory model for CPR with PLR....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Yanru, Jiménez-Herrera, María, Axelsson, Christer, Cheng, Yunzhang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5220624/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28119619
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2016.00665
_version_ 1782492653373358080
author Zhang, Yanru
Jiménez-Herrera, María
Axelsson, Christer
Cheng, Yunzhang
author_facet Zhang, Yanru
Jiménez-Herrera, María
Axelsson, Christer
Cheng, Yunzhang
author_sort Zhang, Yanru
collection PubMed
description Aim: To evaluate, using a simulated haemodynamic circulation model, whether passive leg raising (PLR) is able to improve the effect during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR); to expose the possible reasons why PLR works or not. Materials and Methods: We adapted a circulatory model for CPR with PLR. First we compared cardiac output (CO), coronary perfusion pressure (CPP), blood flow to heart (Q(heart)), and blood flow to neck and brain (Q(head)) of standard chest compression-only CPR with and without PLR; second we simulated the effects of PLR in different situations, by varying the thoracic pump factor (TPF) from 0 to 1; third we simulated the effects when the legs are lifted to the different heights. Finally, we compared our results with those obtained from a published clinical study. Results: According to the simulation model, (1) When TPF is in the interval (0,1), CPP, CO, Q(heart), and Q(head) are improved with PLR, among them with half-thoracic/half-cardiac pump effect (TPF is 0.5), CPP, CO, Q(head), and Q(heart) increase the most (by 14, 14, 15, and 17%). (2) When TPF is 1 (pure thoracic pump, with an emphysema or extremely thick thorax), PLR has almost no effect on CPP, CO, and Q(heart) (−1, 2, and 0%), whereas Q(head) is increased by 9%; (3) Regardless of whether there is a cardiac or thoracic pump effect, PLR is able to increase Q(head) by 9–15%. (4) When the legs are lifted to 30° to the ground, the volume transferred from legs to upper body is 36% of the initial volume in legs; when the legs are lifted to 45°, the volume transferred is 43%; when the legs are lifted to 60°, the volume transferred is 47%; when the legs are lifted to 90°, the volume transferred is 50%. Conclusion: Generally PLR is able to achieve improved cerebral perfusion and coronary perfusion. In some extreme situations, it has no effect on cardiac output and coronary perfusion, but still improves cerebral perfusion. PLR could be a beneficial supplement to CPR, and it is not necessary to lift the legs too high above the ground.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5220624
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52206242017-01-24 Not Bad: Passive Leg Raising in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-A New Modeling Study Zhang, Yanru Jiménez-Herrera, María Axelsson, Christer Cheng, Yunzhang Front Physiol Physiology Aim: To evaluate, using a simulated haemodynamic circulation model, whether passive leg raising (PLR) is able to improve the effect during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR); to expose the possible reasons why PLR works or not. Materials and Methods: We adapted a circulatory model for CPR with PLR. First we compared cardiac output (CO), coronary perfusion pressure (CPP), blood flow to heart (Q(heart)), and blood flow to neck and brain (Q(head)) of standard chest compression-only CPR with and without PLR; second we simulated the effects of PLR in different situations, by varying the thoracic pump factor (TPF) from 0 to 1; third we simulated the effects when the legs are lifted to the different heights. Finally, we compared our results with those obtained from a published clinical study. Results: According to the simulation model, (1) When TPF is in the interval (0,1), CPP, CO, Q(heart), and Q(head) are improved with PLR, among them with half-thoracic/half-cardiac pump effect (TPF is 0.5), CPP, CO, Q(head), and Q(heart) increase the most (by 14, 14, 15, and 17%). (2) When TPF is 1 (pure thoracic pump, with an emphysema or extremely thick thorax), PLR has almost no effect on CPP, CO, and Q(heart) (−1, 2, and 0%), whereas Q(head) is increased by 9%; (3) Regardless of whether there is a cardiac or thoracic pump effect, PLR is able to increase Q(head) by 9–15%. (4) When the legs are lifted to 30° to the ground, the volume transferred from legs to upper body is 36% of the initial volume in legs; when the legs are lifted to 45°, the volume transferred is 43%; when the legs are lifted to 60°, the volume transferred is 47%; when the legs are lifted to 90°, the volume transferred is 50%. Conclusion: Generally PLR is able to achieve improved cerebral perfusion and coronary perfusion. In some extreme situations, it has no effect on cardiac output and coronary perfusion, but still improves cerebral perfusion. PLR could be a beneficial supplement to CPR, and it is not necessary to lift the legs too high above the ground. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-01-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5220624/ /pubmed/28119619 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2016.00665 Text en Copyright © 2017 Zhang, Jiménez-Herrera, Axelsson and Cheng. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Physiology
Zhang, Yanru
Jiménez-Herrera, María
Axelsson, Christer
Cheng, Yunzhang
Not Bad: Passive Leg Raising in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-A New Modeling Study
title Not Bad: Passive Leg Raising in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-A New Modeling Study
title_full Not Bad: Passive Leg Raising in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-A New Modeling Study
title_fullStr Not Bad: Passive Leg Raising in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-A New Modeling Study
title_full_unstemmed Not Bad: Passive Leg Raising in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-A New Modeling Study
title_short Not Bad: Passive Leg Raising in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-A New Modeling Study
title_sort not bad: passive leg raising in cardiopulmonary resuscitation-a new modeling study
topic Physiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5220624/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28119619
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2016.00665
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangyanru notbadpassivelegraisingincardiopulmonaryresuscitationanewmodelingstudy
AT jimenezherreramaria notbadpassivelegraisingincardiopulmonaryresuscitationanewmodelingstudy
AT axelssonchrister notbadpassivelegraisingincardiopulmonaryresuscitationanewmodelingstudy
AT chengyunzhang notbadpassivelegraisingincardiopulmonaryresuscitationanewmodelingstudy