ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Lung tissue injury and hemodynamic effects of ventilations synchronized or unsynchronized to continuous chest compressions in a porcine cardiac arrest model.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chest Compression Synchronized Mechanical Ventilation Modes for Cardiac Arrest; A Scoping Review.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2025Review
- Bag-valve-mask resuscitators fitted with pressure-limiting valves-Safety feature or potential hazard?Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Detecting pneumothorax during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: The potential of defibrillator measured transthoracic impedance.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Compare lung injury and hemodynamic effects in synchronized ventilations (between two chest compressions) vs. unsynchronized ventilations during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in a porcine model of cardiac arrest. Methods: Twenty pigs were randomized to either synchronized or unsynchronized group. Ventricular fibrillation was induced electrically and left for 1.5 minutes. Four minutes of basic chest compression:ventilation (30:2) CPR was followed by eight minutes of either synchronized or unsynchronized ventilations (10/min) during continuous compressions before defibrillation was attempted. Aortic, right atrial and intracerebral pressures, carotid and cerebral blood flow and cardiac output were measured. Airway monitoring included capnography and respiratory function monitor. Macro- and microscopic lung injuries were assessed post-mortem. Results: There were no significant differences between groups in any of the measured hemodynamic variables or inspiration time (0.4 vs. 1.0 s, p = 0.05). The synchronized ventilation group had lower median peak inspiratory airway pressure (57 vs. 94 cm H Conclusion: Synchronized and unsynchronized ventilations resulted in similar hemodynamics and lung injury during continuous mechanical compressions of pigs in cardiac arrest. Animals that received unsynchronized ventilations with one second inspiration time at a rate of ten ventilations per minute were hyperventilated and hyperoxygenated.Institutional protocol number: FOTS, id 6948.
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.