Mechanical devices for cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Current Opinion in Critical Care

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 273-279

  Wigginton, Jane G ^a,c   Isaacs, S Marshal ^a,b   Kay, Joseph J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Dallas Fire Rescue   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Cardiac arrest; Cardiopulmonary arrest; Cardiopulmonary resuscitation; Chest compressions; Mechanical medical devices; Resuscitation

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE COMPRESSION DECOMPRESSION DEVICE; BLOOD FLOW; CIRCULATION; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; DEVICE; HEART ARREST; HEART ASSIST DEVICE; HEMODYNAMICS; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HUMAN; INTRATHORACIC PRESSURE REGULATOR; NONHUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PORTABLE EQUIPMENT; RESUSCITATION; REVIEW; SURVIVAL RATE; THORAX PRESSURE;

ANIMALS; CARDIOPULMONARY RESUSCITATION; EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES; HEART ARREST; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL;

EID: 34249003050     PISSN: 10705295     EISSN: 15317072     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MCC.0b013e328155d4ab     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Abella BS, Alvarado JP, Myklebust H, et al. Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during in-hospital cardiac arrest. JAMA 2005; 293:305-310.
2. Wik L, Kramer-Johansen J, Myklebust H, et al. Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. JAMA 2005; 293:299-304.
3. Chang MW, Coffeen P, Lurie KG, et al. Active compression- decompression CPR improves vital organ perfusion in a dog model of ventricular fibrillation. Chest 1994; 106:1250-1259.
4. Cohen TJ, Goldner BG, Maccaro PC, et al. A comparison of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation with standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation for cardiac arrests occurring in the hospital. N Engl J Med 1993; 329:1918-1921.
5. Cohen TJ, Tucker KJ, Lurie KG, et al. Active compression- decompression: a new method of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Working Group. JAMA 1992; 267:2916-2923.
6. Guly UM, Robertson CE. Active decompression improves the haemodynamic state during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Br Heart J 1995; 73:372-376.
7. Luiz T, Ellinger K, Denz C. Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation does not improve survival in patients with prehospital cardiac arrest in a physician-manned emergency medical system. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 1996; 10:178-186.
8. Lurie KG, Shultz JJ, Callaham ML, et al. Evaluation of active compression-decompression CPR in victims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. JAMA 1994;271:1405-1411.
9. Malzer R, Zeiner A, Binder M, et al. Hemodynamic effects of active compression -decompression after prolonged CPR. Resuscitation 1996; 31:243-253.
10. Mauer D, Schneider T, Dick W, et al. Active compression- decompression resuscitation: a prospective, randomized study in a two-tiered EMS system with physicians in the field. Resuscitation 1996; 33:125-134.
11. Mauer DK, Nolan J, Plaisance P, et al. Effect of active compression-decompression resuscitation (ACD-CPR) on survival: a combined analysis using individual patient data. Resuscitation 1999; 41:249-256.
12. Nolan J, Smith G, Evans R, et al. The United Kingdom prehospital study of active compression-decompression resuscitation. Resuscitation 1998; 37:119-125.
13. Orliaguet GA, Carli PA, Rozenberg A, et al. End-tidal carbon dioxide during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation: comparison of active compression-decompression and standard CPR. Ann Emerg Med 1995; 25:48-51.
14. Pell AC, Guly UM, Sutherland GR, et al. Mechanism of closed chest cardiopulmonary resuscitation investigated by transoesophageal echocardiography. J Accid Emerg Med 1994; 11:139-143.
15. Plaisance P, Adnet F, Vicaut E, et al. Benefit of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation as a prehospital advanced cardiac life support: a randomized multicenter study. Circulation 1997; 95:955-961.
16. Plaisance P, Lurie KG, Vicaut E, et al. A comparison of standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation and active compression-decompression resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. French Active Compression-Decompression Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999; 341:569-575.
17. Schwab TM, Callaham ML, Madsen CD, Utecht TA. A randomized clinical trial of active compression-decompression CPR vs standard CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in two cities. JAMA 1995; 273:1261-1268.
18. Shultz JJ, Coffeen P, Sweeney M, et al. Evaluation of standard and active compression-decompression CPR in an acute human model of ventricular fibrillation. Circulation 1994; 89:684-693.
19. Skogvoll E, Wik L. Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a population-based, prospective randomised clinical trial in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 1999; 42:163-172.
20. Stiell IG, Hebert PC, Wells GA, et al. The Ontario trial of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation for in-hospital and prehospital cardiac arrest. JAMA 1996; 275:1417-1423.
21. Tucker KJ, Galli F, Savitt MA, et al. Active compression- decompression resuscitation: effect on resuscitation success after in-hospital cardiac arrest. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 24:201-209.
22. Tucker KJ, Khan JH, Savitt MA. Active compression-decompression resuscitation: effects on pulmonary ventilation. Resuscitation 1993; 26:125-131.
23. Yannopoulos D, Aufderheide TP, Gabrielli A, et al. Clinical and hemodynamic comparison of 15:2 and 30:2 compression-to-ventilation ratios for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:1444-1449. Animal model of cardiac arrest demonstrating improved hemodynamics and cerebral perfusion pressure with the use of the ITD compared with standard CPR.
24. Plaisance P, Soleil C, Lurie KG, et al. Use of an inspiratory impedance threshold device on a facemask and endotracheal tube to reduce intrathoracic pressures during the decompression phase of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Crit Care Med 2005; 33:990-994.
25. Frascone RJ, Bitz D, Lurie K. Combination of active compression decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the inspiratory impedance threshold device: state of the art. Curr Opin Crit Care 2004; 10:193-201.
26. Plaisance P, Lurie KG, Vicaut E, et al. Evaluation of an impedance threshold device in patients receiving active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out of hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2004; 61:265-271.
27. Wolcke BB, Mauer DK, Schoefmann MF, et al. Comparison of standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus the combination of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation and an inspiratory impedance threshold device for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Circulation 2003; 108:2201-2205.
28. Pirrallo RG, Aufderheide TP, Provo TA, et al. Effect of an inspiratory impedance threshold device on hemodynamics during conventional manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 2005; 66:13-20.
29. Aufderheide TP, Pirrallo RG, Provo TA, et al. Clinical evaluation of an inspiratory impedance threshold device during standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Crit Care Med 2005; 33:734-740.
30. Thayne RC, Thomas DC, Neville JD, Van Dellen A. Use of an impedance threshold device improves short-term outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2005; 67:103-108.
31. Yannopoulos D, Aufderheide TP, McKnite S, et al. Hemodynamic and respiratory effects of negative tracheal pressure during CPR in pigs. Resuscitation 2006; 69:487-494.
32. Yannopoulos D, Nadkarni VM, McKnite SH, et al. Intrathoracic pressure regulator during continuous-chest-compression advanced cardiac resuscitation improves vital organ perfusion pressures in a porcine model of cardiac arrest. Circulation 2005; 112:803-811.
33. Beattie C, Guerci AD, Hall T, et al. Mechanisms of blood flow during pneumatic vest cardiopulmonary resuscitation. J Appl Physiol 1991; 70:454-465.
34. Halperin HR, Guerci AD, Chandra N, et al. Vest inflation without simultaneous ventilation during cardiac arrest in dogs: improved survival from prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Circulation 1986; 74:1407-1415.
35. Halperin HR, Tsitlik JE, Gelfand M, et al. A preliminary study of cardiopulmonary resuscitation by circumferential compression of the chest with use of a pneumatic vest. N Engl J Med 1993; 329:762-768.
36. Halperin HR, Weisfeldt ML. New approaches to CPR: four hands, a plunger, or a vest. JAMA 1992; 267:2940-2941.
37. Hallstrom A, Rea TD, Sayre MR, et al. Manual chest compression vs use of an automated chest compression device during resuscitation following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized trial. JAMA 2006; 295:2620-2628. Multicenter, randomized trial of the AutoPulse versus standard CPR in SCA patients. Ended early due to questions of safety in the AutoPulse group.
38. Ong ME, Ornato JP, Edwards DP, et al. Use of an automated, load-distributing band chest compression device for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation. JAMA 2006; 295:2629-2637. Prehospital study that utilized historical controls. Found improved outcomes, including survival to hospital discharge, in adults with SCA treated with the AutoPulse.
39. Steen S, Liao Q, Pierre L, et al. Evaluation of LUCAS, a new device for automatic mechanical compression and active decompression resuscitation. Resuscitation 2002; 55:285-299.
40. Rubertsson S, Karlsten R. Increased cortical cerebral blood flow with LUCAS; a new device for mechanical chest compressions compared to standard external compressions during experimental cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 2005; 65:357-363.
41. Halliwell D, Box M. Evaluation of LUCAS by Dorset Ambulance Service. British Journal of Resuscitation 2004; 3:10-11.
42. Steen S, Sjoberg T, Olsson P, et al. Treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with LUCAS, a new device for automatic mechanical compression and active decompression resuscitation. Resuscitation 2005; 67:25-30.
43. Axelsson C, Nestin J, Svensson L, et al. Clinical consequences of the introduction of mechanical chest compression in the EMS system for treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a pilot study. Resuscitation 2006; 71:47-55. Pilot study evaluating LUCAS-CPR compared with standard CPR. Showed similar outcomes between the groups.
44. Rubertsson S, Huzevka T. Increased restoration of spontaneous circulation after cardiac arrest with the LUCAS device compared to manual chest compressions: a pilot study. Resuscitation 2006 (ERC Abstracts to the Stavanger meeting). Another pilot study, with this one finding improved ROSC using the LUCAS device compared with standard CPR.
45. Englund E, Kongstad PC. Active compression-decompression CPR necessitates follow-up post mortem. Resuscitation 2006; 68:161-162. Letter to the editor, questioning possible differences in tissue injury patterns after use of the LUCAS device compared with standard CPR.
46. Niemann JT, Rosborough JP, Kassabian L, Salami B. A new device producing manual sternal compression with thoracic constraint for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 2006; 69:295-301. First published study of the LifeBelt. Animal trial showed improved coronary perfusion pressures with use of the device, compared with standard CPR.