• V Wenzel, K H Lindner, A W Prengel, and H U Strohmenger.
• Department of Anesthesiology, University of Ulm, Germany.
• Crit. Care Med. 2000 Apr 1;28(4):1107-12.

ObjectiveThis study was designed to assess the effects of a phased chest and abdominal compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) device, Lifestick, vs. standard CPR on vital organ blood flow in a porcine CPR model.DesignProspective, randomized laboratory investigation using an established porcine model with instrumentation for measurement of hemodynamic variables, vital organ blood flow, blood gases, and return of spontaneous circulation.SettingUniversity hospital research laboratory.SubjectsTwelve domestic pigs.InterventionsAfter 4 mins of untreated ventricular fibrillation, either the Lifestick CPR device (n = 6) or standard CPR (n = 6) was started and maintained for an additional interval of 6 mins before attempting defibrillation.Measurements And Main ResultsDuring CPR, but before epinephrine, use of the Lifestick CPR device resulted in significantly higher (p < .05) mean (+/- SD) coronary perfusion pressure (23+/-9 vs. 10+/-7 mm Hg), cerebral perfusion pressure (29+/-11 vs. 18+/-10 mm Hg), mean arterial pressure (49+/-10 vs. 36+/-13 mm Hg), end-tidal carbon dioxide (32+/-11 vs. 20+/-7 mm Hg), left ventricular myocardial blood flow (44+/-19 vs. 19+/-12 mL x min(-1) x 100 g(-1)), and total cerebral blood flow (29+/-10 vs. 14+/-12 mL x min(-1) x 100 g(-1)). After 45 microg/kg epinephrine, hemodynamic and vital organ blood flow variables increased to comparable levels in both groups.ConclusionsCompared with standard CPR, the Lifestick CPR device increased significantly hemodynamic variables and vital organ blood flow during CPR before epinephrine administration.

19 keywords...

hide…