Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30203237›Full record

ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2018

Chest compression-associated injuries in cardiac arrest patients treated with manual chest compressions versus automated chest compression devices (LUCAS II) - a forensic autopsy-based comparison.

Benjamin Ondruschka, Christina Baier, Ronny Bayer, Niels Hammer, Jan Dreßler, Michael Bernhard

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Rib fractures and other injuries after cardiopulmonary resuscitation for non-traumatic cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Outcomes of patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest transported to an ECMO centre compared with transport to non-ECMO centres.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Benjamin OndruschkaInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. benjamin.ondruschka@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.
Christina BaierInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Ronny BayerInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Niels HammerDepartment of Anatomy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Jan DreßlerInstitute of Legal Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Michael BernhardEmergency Department, Heinrich Heine University, University Hospital, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Leipzig University · DEHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEUniversity of Otago · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this autopsy study was to investigate chest-compression associated injuries to the trunk in out-of-hospital and in-hospital non-traumatic cardiac arrest patients treated with automated external chest compression devices (ACCD; all with LUCAS II devices) versus exclusive manual chest compressions (mCC). In this retrospective single-center study, all forensic autopsies between 2011 and 2017 were included. Injuries following cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in patients treated with mCC or ACCD were investigated and statistically compared using a bivariate logistic regression. In the seven-year period with 4433 autopsies, 614 were analyzed following CPR (mCC vs. ACCD: n = 501 vs. n = 113). The presence of any type of trunk injury was correlated with longer resuscitation intervals (30 ± 15 vs. 44 ± 25 min, p < 0.05). In comparison with mCC, treatment with ACCD led to more frequent skin emphysema (5 vs 0%, p = 0.012), pneumothorax (6 vs. 1%, p = 0.008), lung lesions (19 vs. 4%, p = 0.008), hemopericardium (3 vs 1%, p = 0.025) and liver lesions (10 vs. 1%, p = 0.001), all irrespective of confounding aspects. Higher age and longer CPR durations statistically influenced frequency of sternal and rib fractures (p < 0.001). The mean number of fractured ribs did not vary significantly between the groups (6 ± 3 vs. 7 ± 2, p = 0.09). In this cohort with unsuccessful CPR, chest compression-related injuries were more frequent following ACCD application than in the mCC group, but with only minutely increased odds ratios. The severity of injuries did not differ between the groups, and no iatrogenic injury was declared by the forensic pathologist as being fatal. In the clinical routine after successful return of spontaneous circulation a computed tomography scan for CPR-associated injuries is recommended as soon as possible.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationEmphysemaFemaleForensic PathologyFractures, BoneHeart ArrestHumansLiverMaleMiddle AgedPericardial EffusionPneumothoraxRetrospective StudiesSternumThoracic InjuriesAutomated chest compression devicesCardiopulmonary resuscitationForensic autopsyInjury frequencyManual chest compressionRib fractures

Identifiers

PMID30203237
OpenAlexW2890973759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.