Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41399337›Full record

ReviewArchives of academic emergency medicine2025

Chest Compression Synchronized Mechanical Ventilation Modes for Cardiac Arrest; A Scoping Review.

Roman Brock, Christoph Veigl, Andrea Kornfehl, Johannes Wittig, Sabine Heider, Karina Tapinova, Erwin Snijders, Sabine Dunkl, Daniel Grassmann, Birgit Heller and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Roman BrockDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medial University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Christoph VeiglDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medial University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Andrea KornfehlDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medial University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Johannes WittigResearch Center for Emergency Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Sabine HeiderPULS - Austrian Cardiac Arrest Awareness Association, Vienna, Austria.
Karina TapinovaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medial University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Erwin SnijdersDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Sabine DunklEmergency Medical Service Vienna, Austria.
Daniel GrassmannEmergency Medical Service Vienna, Austria.
Birgit HellerUniversity Library, Medical University of Vienna, Austria.
Mario KrammelPULS - Austrian Cardiac Arrest Awareness Association, Vienna, Austria.
Sebastian SchnaubeltDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medial University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Chest Compression Synchronized Ventilation (CCSV) is a novel approach aimed at optimizing gas exchange and hemodynamics during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). However, its clinical value, safety profile and implementation barriers remain unclear. This study aimed to systematically synthesize existing evidence on the use of CCSV during cardiac arrest in animals and humans. Methods: We conducted a scoping review and systematically searched five databases (Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science) up to May 2025. Studies investigating CCSV or mechanistically related ventilation strategies during cardiac arrest were included regardless of study design, language or publication date. Data were charted for study characteristics, outcomes and adverse events. Results: Thirty-two studies published between 1980 and 2025 were included. Most were animal studies (n=19), primarily conducted in pigs, with limited human data (n=10). CCSV showed positive effects on arterial oxygenation, carbon dioxide clearance, and hemodynamic parameters as well as cerebral oxygenation compared to conventional ventilation modes. Adverse events such as pneumothorax and lung injury were inconsistently reported. Conclusions: Available data on CCSV suggests potential physiological benefits during CPR, particularly in experimental settings. Human data remain scarce, and larger, prospective human trials are essential to evaluate clinical effectiveness, guide implementation, and assess risks compared to conventional ventilation strategies.

Indexed as

Cardiac arrestCardiopulmonary resuscitationChest compressionreviewVentilation

Identifiers

PMID41399337
PMCPMC12702506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.