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: Comparison of different resuscitation methods with regard to injury patterns in cardiac arrest survivors based on computer tomography.
    Author: Viniol S, Thomas RP, Gombert S, König AM, Betz S, Mahnken AH.
    Journal: Eur J Radiol; 2020 Oct; 131():109244. PubMed ID: 32905956.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To ensure that patients survive cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is needed. However, the procedure itself can lead to severe injuries. This study aims to examine both possibilities of resuscitation - mechanical or manual - with regard to their risk of injury. To this end, we compare the injuries patterns in both groups of patients after successful resuscitation based on computer tomography (CT). METHODS: This single-centre retrospective study included 32 patients (female: 21.87 %, male: 78.12 %, Mean age: 60.22 ± 13.93 years) with cardiac arrest followed by successful mechanical CPR, who underwent an early whole-body CT. A control group of 32 patients (female: 21.87 %, male: 78.12 %, mean age: 60.75 ± 13.34 years) that had been resuscitated successfully with manual CPR was matched according to gender and age for a better statistical comparison. Patients with cardiac arrest due to trauma were excluded from the study population. RESULTS: Mechanically resuscitated patients showed significantly more CPR-related injuries than those who were resuscitated manually (100 % vs. 84.37 %; p = 0.02). In particular, dislocated rib fractures (40.47 vs. 23.80 mean rank, p < 0.01), sternal fractures (74.19 % vs. 25 %; p < 0,01), bleeding complications (29.03 % vs. 3.12 %; p = 0.01), pneumothorax (38.71 % vs. 9.37 %; p = 0.01), mediastinal haematomas (58.01 % vs. 25 %, p = 0.01) and liver lacerations (29.03 % vs. 0 %, p = 0.04) were observed significantly more in patients after mechanical CPR compared to those with manual resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: The guideline-based use of mechanical CPR results in a significant increase of internal and musculoskeletal injuries compared to manual CPR.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]