ArticleResuscitation plus2026
Ventilatory parameters during emergency department-based CPR and exploratory associations with return of spontaneous circulation.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Evidence guiding ventilation strategies during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in humans remains limited, particularly in real-world emergency department (ED) settings. Existing recommendations are largely derived from animal studies and controlled environments, and how ventilation is delivered during ED-based CPR has not been well characterized. Methods: This single-center prospective observational study described ventilation practices during ED-based CPR in adult patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest who underwent endotracheal intubation. Minute ventilation, ventilation volume, and ventilation rate were measured using a flow sensor attached after ED arrival. Ventilatory parameters were summarized as patient-level averages during the recorded CPR period and compared between patients who achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and those who did not. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to explore potential associations with ROSC. Results: Among 100 included patients, 49 (49%) achieved ROSC. Median patient-average ventilation rate (19 [15-28] vs 18 [13-28] breaths/min; Conclusion: Ventilation practices during ED-based CPR showed substantial variability and frequently deviated from guideline-recommended targets. While exploratory analyses suggested a potential association between moderate minute ventilation and ROSC, these findings are descriptive and hypothesis-generating. Further studies with predefined ventilation targets and time-dependent analyses are required to clarify optimal ventilation strategies during CPR.
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.