ArticlePloS one2016
Different Respiratory Rates during Resuscitation in a Pediatric Animal Model of Asphyxial Cardiac Arrest.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Volumetric capnography and return of spontaneous circulation in an experimental model of pediatric asphyxial cardiac arrest.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Effects of airway management and tidal volume feedback ventilation during pediatric resuscitation in piglets with asphyxial cardiac arrest.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- [Paediatric Life Support].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021Review
- The use of pressure-controlled mechanical ventilation in a swine model of intraoperative pediatric cardiac arrest.Paediatric anaesthesia · 2020Article
- Effect of ventilation rate on recovery after cardiac arrest in a pediatric animal model.PloS one · 2020Article
- Ventilation Rates and Pediatric In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survival Outcomes.Critical care medicine · 2019Observational
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsActual resuscitation guidelines recommend 10 respirations per minute (rpm) for advanced pediatric life support. This respiratory rate (RR) is much lower than what is physiological for children. The aim of this study is to compare changes in ventilation, oxygenation, haemodynamics and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rates with three RR.
methodsAn experimental model of asphyxial cardiac arrest (CA) in 46 piglets (around 9.5 kg) was performed. Resuscitation with three different RR (10, 20 and 30 rpm) was carried out. Haemodynamics and gasometrical data were obtained at 3, 9, 18 and 24 minutes after beginning of resuscitation. Measurements were compared between the three groups.
resultsNo statistical differences were found in ROSC rate between the three RR (37.5%, 46.6% and 60% in the 10, 20 and 30 rpm group respectively P = 0.51). 20 and 30 rpm groups had lower PaCO2 values than 10 rpm group at 3 minutes (58 and 55 mmHg vs 75 mmHg P = 0.08). 30 rpm group had higher PaO2 (61 mmHg) at 3 minutes than 20 and 10 rpm groups (53 and 45 mmHg P = 0.05). No significant differences were found in haemodynamics or tissue perfusion between hyperventilated (PaCO2 <30 mmHg), normoventilated (30-50 mmHg) and hypoventilated (>50 mmHg) animals. PaO2 was significantly higher in hyperventilated (PaO2 153 mmHg) than in normoventilated (79 mmHg) and hypoventilated (47 mmHg) piglets (P<0.001).
conclusionsOur study confirms the hypothesis that higher RR achieves better oxygenation and ventilation without affecting haemodynamics. A higher RR is associated but not significantly with better ROSC rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.