301 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27054624)
1. Update on mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation devices.
Rubertsson S
Curr Opin Crit Care; 2016 Jun; 22(3):225-9. PubMed ID: 27054624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest.
Wang PL; Brooks SC
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2018 Aug; 8(8):CD007260. PubMed ID: 30125048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest.
Brooks SC; Hassan N; Bigham BL; Morrison LJ
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2014 Feb; (2):CD007260. PubMed ID: 24574099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mechanical devices for chest compression: to use or not to use?
Couper K; Smyth M; Perkins GD
Curr Opin Crit Care; 2015 Jun; 21(3):188-94. PubMed ID: 25887299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [The use of mechanical chest compression devices for both out-of-hospital and in-hospital refractory cardiac arrest].
Russo A; Gasparetto N; Favero L; Caico SI; Orazio S; Garzena G; Rosi P; Olivari Z
G Ital Cardiol (Rome); 2017 Apr; 18(4):305-312. PubMed ID: 28492570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Mechanical chest compression devices at in-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Couper K; Yeung J; Nicholson T; Quinn T; Lall R; Perkins GD
Resuscitation; 2016 Jun; 103():24-31. PubMed ID: 26976675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Role of manual and mechanical chest compressions during resuscitation efforts throughout cardiac arrest.
Ewy GA; Zuercher M
Future Cardiol; 2013 Nov; 9(6):863-73. PubMed ID: 24180542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Mechanical cardiac massage].
Christensen PH; Barnung S; Steinmetz J
Ugeskr Laeger; 2009 Aug; 171(35):2463-5. PubMed ID: 19732531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The LUCAS 2 chest compression device is not always efficient: an echographic confirmation.
Giraud R; Siegenthaler N; Schussler O; Kalangos A; Müller H; Bendjelid K; Banfi C
Ann Emerg Med; 2015 Jan; 65(1):23-6. PubMed ID: 24530109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest.
Brooks SC; Bigham BL; Morrison LJ
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2011 Jan; (1):CD007260. PubMed ID: 21249689
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Transport with ongoing resuscitation: a comparison between manual and mechanical compression.
Gässler H; Ventzke MM; Lampl L; Helm M
Emerg Med J; 2013 Jul; 30(7):589-92. PubMed ID: 22833595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Manual Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Versus CPR Including a Mechanical Chest Compression Device in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis From Randomized and Observational Studies.
Bonnes JL; Brouwer MA; Navarese EP; Verhaert DV; Verheugt FW; Smeets JL; de Boer MJ
Ann Emerg Med; 2016 Mar; 67(3):349-360.e3. PubMed ID: 26607332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mechanical chest compressions improve rate of return of spontaneous circulation and allow for initiation of percutaneous circulatory support during cardiac arrest in the cardiac catheterization laboratory.
Venturini JM; Retzer E; Estrada JR; Friant J; Beiser D; Edelson D; Paul J; Blair J; Nathan S; Shah AP
Resuscitation; 2017 Jun; 115():56-60. PubMed ID: 28377296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Part 6: Alternative Techniques and Ancillary Devices for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.
Brooks SC; Anderson ML; Bruder E; Daya MR; Gaffney A; Otto CW; Singer AJ; Thiagarajan RR; Travers AH
Circulation; 2015 Nov; 132(18 Suppl 2):S436-43. PubMed ID: 26472994
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. LUCAS 2™ device, compression depth, and the 2010 cardiopulmonary resuscitation guidelines.
Trivedi K; Borovnik-Lesjak V; Gazmuri RJ
Am J Emerg Med; 2013 Jul; 31(7):1154.e1-2. PubMed ID: 23688566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. LUCAS compared to manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation is more effective during helicopter rescue-a prospective, randomized, cross-over manikin study.
Putzer G; Braun P; Zimmermann A; Pedross F; Strapazzon G; Brugger H; Paal P
Am J Emerg Med; 2013 Feb; 31(2):384-9. PubMed ID: 23000324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Safety of mechanical and manual chest compressions in cardiac arrest patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Gao Y; Sun T; Yuan D; Liang H; Wan Y; Yuan B; Zhu C; Li Y; Yu Y
Resuscitation; 2021 Dec; 169():124-135. PubMed ID: 34699924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Active chest compression-decompression for cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Lafuente-Lafuente C; Melero-Bascones M
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Sep; 2013(9):CD002751. PubMed ID: 24052483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a meta-analysis.
Westfall M; Krantz S; Mullin C; Kaufman C
Crit Care Med; 2013 Jul; 41(7):1782-9. PubMed ID: 23660728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Improved neurological outcome with continuous chest compressions compared with 30:2 compressions-to-ventilations cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a realistic swine model of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
Ewy GA; Zuercher M; Hilwig RW; Sanders AB; Berg RA; Otto CW; Hayes MM; Kern KB
Circulation; 2007 Nov; 116(22):2525-30. PubMed ID: 17998457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
