ArticleResuscitation plus2022
Suction cup on a piston-based chest compression device improves coronary perfusion pressure and cerebral oxygenation during experimental cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Continuous chest compressions are associated with higher peak inspiratory pressures when compared to 30:2 in an experimental cardiac arrest model.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2023Article
- A Review of CPR Augmentation Devices.Cureus · 2023Review
- Cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation in "hostile" environments: Using automated compression devices to minimize the rescuers' danger.World journal of cardiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The presented study aimed to investigate whether a mechanical chest compression piston device with a suction cup assisting chest recoil could impact the hemodynamic status when compared to a bare piston during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Methods: 16 piglets were anesthetized and randomized into 2 groups. After 3 minutes of induced ventricular fibrillation, a LUCAS 3 device was used to perform chest compressions, in one group a suction cup was mounted on the device's piston, while in the other group, compressions were performed by the bare piston. The device was used in 30:2 mode and the animals were manually ventilated. Endpoints of the study were: end tidal carbon dioxide, coronary and cerebral perfusion pressures, and brain oxygenation (measured using near infrared spectroscopy). At the end of the protocol, the animals that got a return to spontaneous circulation were observed for 60 minutes, then euthanized. Results: No difference was found in end tidal carbon dioxide or tidal volumes. Coronary perfusion pressure and cerebral oxygenation were higher in the Suction cup group over the entire experiment time, while cerebral perfusion pressure was higher only in the last 5 minutes of CPR. A passive tidal volume (air going in and out the airways during compressions) was detected and found correlated to end tidal carbon dioxide. Conclusions: The use of a suction cup on a piston-based chest compression device did not increase end tidal carbon dioxide, but it was associated to a higher coronary perfusion pressure.
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.