• M E Boczar, M A Howard, E P Rivers, G B Martin, H M Horst, C Lewandowski, M C Tomlanovich, and R M Nowak.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, Henry Ford Health Systems, Detroit, MI 48202.
• Crit. Care Med. 1995 Mar 1;23(3):498-503.

ObjectiveTo compare the hemodynamics of closed-chest cardiac massage vs. open-chest cardiac massage in patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest that occurred outside of the hospital.DesignProspective, non-outcome, case series.SettingLarge urban emergency department.PatientsTen adult, normothermic, nontraumatic, out-of-hospital, cardiac arrest patients who failed advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) therapy.InterventionsPatients presenting to the hospital in cardiac arrest were managed according to the ACLS protocol at the clinician's discretion. Proximal aortic and central venous pressure catheters were placed to measure arteriovenous compression- and relaxation-phase pressure gradients. After 5 mins of baseline measurements during closed-chest cardiac massage, patients underwent a left lateral thoracotomy, and open-chest cardiac massage was performed for 5 mins.Measurements And Main ResultsThe mean coronary perfusion pressure and compression-phase pressure gradients were 7.3 +/- 5.7 and 6.2 +/- 5.4 mm Hg, respectively, during closed-chest cardiac massage, while increasing to 32.6 +/- 17.8 and 32.6 +/- 29.9 mm Hg, respectively, during open-chest cardiac massage. The differences between both measurements were statistically significant (p < .05).ConclusionsOpen-chest cardiac massage is superior to closed-chest cardiac massage in providing relaxation-phase and compression-phase pressure gradients during cardiac arrest in patients failing current ACLS protocols. During open-chest cardiac massage, all patients exceeded the minimum coronary perfusion pressure of 15 mm Hg, which is recommended to obtain a return of spontaneous circulation. Further outcome studies are needed to determine the timeliness and appropriate indications for open-chest cardiac massage.

16 keywords...

hide…