Dataset Information

Reliability of mechanical ventilation during continuous chest compressions: a crossover study of transport ventilators in a human cadaver model of CPR.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Previous studies have stated that hyperventilation often occurs in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) mainly due to excessive ventilation frequencies, especially when a manual valve bag is used. Transport ventilators may provide mandatory ventilation with predetermined tidal volumes and without the risk of hyperventilation. Nonetheless, interactions between chest compressions and ventilations are likely to occur. We investigated whether transport ventilators can provide adequate alveolar ventilation during continuous chest compression in adult CPR.

Methods

A three-period crossover study with three common transport ventilators in a cadaver model of CPR was carried out. The three ventilators 'MEDUMAT Standard²', 'Oxylog 3000 plus', and 'Monnal T60' represent three different interventions, providing volume-controlled continuous mandatory ventilation (VC-CMV) via an endotracheal tube with a tidal volume of 6 mL/kg predicted body weight. Proximal airflow was measured, and the net tidal volume was derived for each respiratory cycle. The deviation from the predetermined tidal volume was calculated and analysed. Several mixed linear models were calculated with the cadaver as a random factor and ventilator, height, sex, crossover period and incremental number of each ventilation within the period as covariates to evaluate differences between ventilators.

Results

Overall median deviation of net tidal volume from predetermined tidal volume was - 21.2 % (IQR: 19.6, range: [- 87.9 %; 25.8 %]) corresponding to a tidal volume of 4.75 mL/kg predicted body weight (IQR: 1.2, range: [0.7; 7.6]). In a mixed linear model, the ventilator model, the crossover period, and the cadaver's height were significant factors for decreased tidal volume. The estimated effects of tidal volume deviation for each ventilator were - 14.5 % [95 %-CI: -22.5; -6.5] (p = 0.0004) for 'Monnal T60', - 30.6 % [95 %-CI: -38.6; -22.6] (p < 0.0001) for 'Oxylog 3000 plus' and - 31.0 % [95 %-CI: -38.9; -23.0] (p < 0.0001) for 'MEDUMAT Standard²'.

Conclusions

All investigated transport ventilators were able to provide alveolar ventilation even though chest compressions considerably decreased tidal volumes. Our results support the concept of using ventilators to avoid excessive ventilatory rates in CPR. This experimental study suggests that healthcare professionals should carefully monitor actual tidal volumes to recognise the occurrence of hypoventilation during continuous chest compressions.

SUBMITTER: Orlob S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8316711 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:If transport under ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) from an upper floor is indicated, the ideal CPR-method and evacuation route is unknown hitherto. We aimed to elaborate a strategy for evacuation of patients under ongoing CPR from an upper floor, comparing three different evacuation routes and manual and mechanical chest compressions. METHODS:A CPR-training manikin recording CPR-quality was placed on the fifth floor and was evacuated to an ambulance via lift, turntable ladder, or staircase. Chest compressions were performed manually or with a mechanical CPR-device. Efficiency endpoints were compression depth and frequency, sufficiency of chest release, compared with European Resuscitation Council (ERC) Guidelines, and duration of the evacuation. Adverse outcomes were disconnection/dislocation of devices and hazards/accidents to the personnel. RESULTS:For all evacuation routes, compression depth and frequency were significantly more compliant with ERC-guidelines under mechanical CPR. Manual CPR was associated with considerable deviations from correct compression depth and frequency. Chest release only slightly differed between groups. Evacuation via lift under mechanical CPR was fastest and evacuation via turntable ladder under manual CPR was slowest. No device disconnections or accidents occurred, but hazard to personnel was perceived during evacuation via ladder under manual CPR. CONCLUSIONS:In this study, a mechanical CPR-device proved to deliver better CPR-quality during evacuation from an upper floor. If a lift accessible with a stretcher is available, this route should be preferred, regardless of manual or mechanical CPR. Turntable ladders can only be meaningfully used with mechanical CPR, otherwise CPR-quality is poor and hazard to the personnel is increased. Not all evacuation routes may be useable in a specific real-life scenario. TRIAL REGISTRATION:German Clinical Trials Registry, www.drks.de, registration number DRKS00012885, registration date 17.08.2017.

Project description:BACKGROUND:High-quality chest compressions are imperative for Cardio-Pulmonary-Resuscitation (CPR). International CPR guidelines advocate, that chest compressions should not be interrupted for ventilation once a patient's trachea is intubated or a supraglottic-airway-device positioned. Supraglottic-airway-devices offer limited protection against pulmonary aspiration. Simultaneous chest compressions and positive pressure ventilation both increase intrathoracic pressure and potentially enhances the risk of pulmonary aspiration. The hypothesis was, that regurgitation and pulmonary aspiration is more common during continuous versus interrupted chest compressions in human cadavers ventilated with a laryngeal tube airway. METHODS:Twenty suitable cadavers were included, and were positioned supine, the stomach was emptied, 500 ml of methylene-blue-solution instilled and laryngeal tube inserted. Cadavers were randomly assigned to: 1) continuous chest compressions; or, 2) interrupted chest compressions for ventilation breaths. After 14 minutes of the initial designated CPR strategy, pulmonary aspiration was assessed with a flexible bronchoscope. The methylene-blue-solution was replaced by 500 ml barium-sulfate radiopaque suspension. 14 minutes of CPR with the second designated ventilation strategy was performed. Pulmonary aspiration was then assessed with a conventional chest X-ray. RESULTS:Two cadavers were excluded for technical reasons, leaving 18 cadavers for statistical analysis. Pulmonary aspiration was observed in 9 (50%) cadavers with continuous chest compressions, and 7 (39%) with interrupted chest compressions (P = 0.75). CONCLUSION:Our pilot study indicate, that incidence of pulmonary aspiration is generally high in patients undergoing CPR when a laryngeal tube is used for ventilation. Our study was not powered to identify potentially important differences in regurgitation or aspiration between ongoing vs. interrupted chest compression. Our results nonetheless suggest that interrupted chest compressions might better protect against pulmonary aspiration when a laryngeal tube is used for ventilation.