• Ann Emerg Med · Aug 1989

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial

    A comparison of interposed abdominal compression CPR and standard CPR by monitoring end-tidal PCO2.

    • K R Ward, R J Sullivan, R R Zelenak, and W R Summer.
    • Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112.
    • Ann Emerg Med. 1989 Aug 1; 18 (8): 831-7.

    AbstractInterposed abdominal compression CPR (IAC-CPR) has been demonstrated to significantly improve blood flow compared with standard (S)-CPR in animal and electrical models. Studies with IAC-CPR in human beings have not reported data regarding cardiac output. Animal and clinical studies have correlated end-tidal PCO2 (ETPCO2) with cardiac output produced with precordial compressions. We conducted a prospective, randomized study on 33 adult patients with nontraumatic cardiac arrest. Patients were randomized to initially receive either S-CPR or IAC-CPR. ETPCO2 was monitored continuously. After 20 minutes of resuscitation, the technique was reversed. The average ETPCO2 during IAC-CPR was 17.1 mm Hg while the average during S-CPR was 9.6 mm Hg, a difference of 78% (P less than .001). In patients arriving in cardiac arrest, return of spontaneous circulation was observed in six patients (30%) during IAC-CPR and in one patient (6%) during S-CPR (P = .07). Our study strongly suggests that cardiac output may be significantly increased in human beings with IAC-CPR as evidenced by the significantly greater increases in ETPCO2 with IAC-CPR compared with S-CPR. In addition, IAC-CPR appeared to demonstrate a trend toward increasing the return of spontaneous circulation.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.