Active compression-decompression CPR was investigated
after a published anecdote of successful resuscitation in which a
toilet plunger was used. This method mechanically lifts the
sternum between depressions, thereby actively decreasing intrathoracic
pressure during diastole and promoting venous return
to the heart rather than relying on passive recoil of the thorax
. Although initial animal studies suggested improved
flow parameters with active compression-decompression CPR,
a meta-analysis of human trials did not show clear improvement
in survival. An impedance threshold device attached to an
endotracheal tube can augment venous return into the thorax
during diastole by preventing air suction into the chest when
there is negative intrathoracic pressure. This device improves
hemodynamics during chest compression in an animal model,
94,95 and combining an impedance threshold device with active
compression-decompression CPR has improved short-term survival
in humans.96 The interposed abdominal compression CPR
method requires 2 rescuers, who alternately compress the chest
and the abdomen in a seesaw motion , with the
possible mechanisms of augmenting diastolic aortic pressure as
well as forcing visceral venous blood into the chest between
thoracic compressions. Clinical trials have demonstrated improved
survival with interposed abdominal compression CPR
over conventional CPR after inpatient97 but not outpatient
cardiac arrest. A mechanical piston device can replicate manual
chest compressions, shows improvements in some physiological
parameters, and can be used as an approximately equivalent
alternative to traditional CPR.
In summary, many different techniques and devices for chest
compression exist, but direct comparison between them is not
possible, and no single method has been definitively shown to
produce the best outcomes. The most significant confounder of
these trials is the highly variable quality of conventional CPR
technique, which is difficult to quantify, especially in out-ofhospital
resuscitation. Future trials should strive to better characterize
the quality of chest compression delivery in the context
of current CPR guidelines to permit more valid comparison
between studies, as well as to discover the best outcomes that
can realistically be achieved with closed-chest CPR.
If, despite optimizing external chest compression, hemodynamics,
neurological recovery, and overall survival do not
improve, consideration should be given to revisiting open-chest
cardiac massage whenever prolonged resuscitation is expected.
Active compression-decompression CPR was investigated
after a published anecdote of successful resuscitation in which a
toilet plunger was used. This method mechanically lifts the
sternum between depressions, thereby actively decreasing intrathoracic
pressure during diastole and promoting venous return
to the heart rather than relying on passive recoil of the thorax
. Although initial animal studies suggested improved
flow parameters with active compression-decompression CPR,
a meta-analysis of human trials did not show clear improvement
in survival. An impedance threshold device attached to an
endotracheal tube can augment venous return into the thorax
during diastole by preventing air suction into the chest when
there is negative intrathoracic pressure. This device improves
hemodynamics during chest compression in an animal model,
94,95 and combining an impedance threshold device with active
compression-decompression CPR has improved short-term survival
in humans.96 The interposed abdominal compression CPR
method requires 2 rescuers, who alternately compress the chest
and the abdomen in a seesaw motion , with the
possible mechanisms of augmenting diastolic aortic pressure as
well as forcing visceral venous blood into the chest between
thoracic compressions. Clinical trials have demonstrated improved
survival with interposed abdominal compression CPR
over conventional CPR after inpatient97 but not outpatient
cardiac arrest. A mechanical piston device can replicate manual
chest compressions, shows improvements in some physiological
parameters, and can be used as an approximately equivalent
alternative to traditional CPR.
In summary, many different techniques and devices for chest
compression exist, but direct comparison between them is not
possible, and no single method has been definitively shown to
produce the best outcomes. The most significant confounder of
these trials is the highly variable quality of conventional CPR
technique, which is difficult to quantify, especially in out-ofhospital
resuscitation. Future trials should strive to better characterize
the quality of chest compression delivery in the context
of current CPR guidelines to permit more valid comparison
between studies, as well as to discover the best outcomes that
can realistically be achieved with closed-chest CPR.
If, despite optimizing external chest compression, hemodynamics,
neurological recovery, and overall survival do not
improve, consideration should be given to revisiting open-chest
cardiac massage whenever prolonged resuscitation is expected.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
