• S Eichhorn, A Mendoza, A Prinzing, A Stroh, L Xinghai, M Polski, M Heller, H Lahm, E Wolf, R Lange, and M Krane.
• Institute for Translational Cardiac Surgery (INSURE), Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
• Biomed Res Int. 2017 Jan 1; 2017: 5470406.

AbstractAccording to the European Resuscitation Council guidelines, the use of mechanical chest compression devices is a reasonable alternative in situations where manual chest compression is impractical or compromises provider safety. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of a recently developed chest compression device (Corpuls CPR) with an established system (LUCAS II) in a pig model. Methods. Pigs (n = 5/group) in provoked ventricular fibrillation were left untreated for 5 minutes, after which 15 min of cardiopulmonary resuscitation was performed with chest compressions. After 15 min, defibrillation was performed every 2 min if necessary, and up to 3 doses of adrenaline were given. If there was no return of spontaneous circulation after 25 min, the experiment was terminated. Coronary perfusion pressure, carotid blood flow, end-expiratory CO2, regional oxygen saturation by near infrared spectroscopy, blood gas, and local organ perfusion with fluorescent labelled microspheres were measured at baseline and during resuscitation. Results. Animals treated with Corpuls CPR had significantly higher mean arterial pressures during resuscitation, along with a detectable trend of greater carotid blood flow and organ perfusion. Conclusion. Chest compressions with the Corpuls CPR device generated significantly higher mean arterial pressures than compressions performed with the LUCAS II device.

20 keywords...

hide…