These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Out-of-hospital airway management during manual compression or automated chest compression devices : A registry-based analysis.
    Author: Bernhard M, Behrens NH, Wnent J, Seewald S, Brenner S, Jantzen T, Bohn A, Gräsner JT, Fischer M.
    Journal: Anaesthesist; 2018 Feb; 67(2):109-117. PubMed ID: 29302698.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Airway management during resuscitation is pivotal for treating hypoxia and inducing reoxygenation. This German Resuscitation Registry (GRR) analysis investigated the influence of the type of airway used in patients treated with manual chest compression (mCC) and automated chest compression devices (ACCD) after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS: Out of 42,977 patients (1 January 2010-30 June 2016) information on outcome, airway management and method of chest compressions were available for 27,544 patients. Hospital admission under cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), hospital admission with return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hospital discharge and discharge with cerebral performance categories 1 and 2 (CPC 1,2) were used to compare outcome in patients treated with mCC vs. ACCD, and classified by endotracheal intubation (ETI), initial supraglottic airway device (SAD) changed into ETI, and only SAD use. RESULTS: Outcomes for hospital admission under ongoing CPR, hospital admission with ROSC, hospital discharge and neurologically intact survival (CPC 1,2) for mCC (84.8%) vs. ACCD (15.2%) groups were: 8.4/38.6%, 39.2/27.2%, 10.6/6.8%, 7.9/4.7% (p < 0.001), respectively. Only mCC with SAD/ETI for ever ROSC (OR 1.466, 95% CI: 1.353-1.588, p < 0.001) and mCC group with SAD/ETI for hospital admission with ROSC showed better outcomes (odds ratio [OR] 1.277, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.179-1.384, p < 0.001) in comparison to mCC treated with ETI. Compared to mCC/ETI, all other groups were associated with a decrease in neurologically intact survival. CONCLUSION: Better outcomes were found for mCC in comparison to ACCD and ETI showed better outcomes in comparison to SAD only. This observational registry study raised the hypothesis that SAD only should be avoided or SAD should be changed into ETI, independent of whether mCC or ACCD is used.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]