Comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.

<h4>Introduction</h4>There are no studies comparing synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation with bag-valve mask ventilation (BVMV) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in pediatric patients. The main aim is to compare between synchronized and non-synchronized BVMV with chest...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gema Manrique, Miriam García, Sarah N Fernández, Rafael González, María J Solana, Jorge López, Javier Urbano, Jesús López-Herce
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219660
id doaj-c2c0d97153d04081b497710c6f123f98
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c2c0d97153d04081b497710c6f123f982021-03-04T10:27:50ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01147e021966010.1371/journal.pone.0219660Comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.Gema ManriqueMiriam GarcíaSarah N FernándezRafael GonzálezMaría J SolanaJorge LópezJavier UrbanoJesús López-Herce<h4>Introduction</h4>There are no studies comparing synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation with bag-valve mask ventilation (BVMV) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in pediatric patients. The main aim is to compare between synchronized and non-synchronized BVMV with chest compressions (CC), and between guided and non-guided CC with a real-time feedback-device in a pediatric animal model of asphyxial cardiac arrest (CA). The secondary aim is to analyze the quality of CC during resuscitation.<h4>Methods</h4>60 piglets were randomized for CPR into four groups: Group A: guided-CC and synchronized ventilation; Group B: guided-CC and non-synchronized ventilation; Group C: non-guided CC and synchronized ventilation; Group D: non-guided CC and non-synchronized ventilation. Return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hemodynamic and respiratory parameters, and quality of CC were compared between all groups.<h4>Results</h4>60 piglets were included. Twenty-six (46.5%) achieved ROSC: A (46.7%), B (66.7%), C (26.7%) and D (33.3%). Survival rates were higher in group B than in groups A+C+D (66.7% vs 35.6%, p = 0.035). ROSC was higher with guided-CC (A+B 56.7% vs C+D 30%, p = 0.037). Piglets receiving non-synchronized ventilation did not show different rates of ROSC than synchronized ventilation (B+D 50% vs A+C 36.7%, p = 0.297). Non-synchronized groups showed lower arterial pCO2 after 3 minutes of CPR than synchronized groups: 57 vs 71 mmHg, p = 0.019. No differences were found in arterial pH and pO2, mean arterial pressure (MAP) or cerebral blood flow between groups. Chest compressions were shallower in surviving than in non-surviving piglets (4.7 vs 5.1 cm, p = 0.047). There was a negative correlation between time without CC and MAP (r = -0.35, p = 0.038).<h4>Conclusions</h4>The group receiving non-synchronized ventilation and guided-CC obtained significantly higher ROSC rates than the other modalities of resuscitation. Guided-CC achieved higher ROSC rates than non-guided CC. Non-synchronized ventilation was associated with better ventilation parameters, with no differences in hemodynamics or cerebral flow.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219660
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gema Manrique
Miriam García
Sarah N Fernández
Rafael González
María J Solana
Jorge López
Javier Urbano
Jesús López-Herce
spellingShingle Gema Manrique
Miriam García
Sarah N Fernández
Rafael González
María J Solana
Jorge López
Javier Urbano
Jesús López-Herce
Comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Gema Manrique
Miriam García
Sarah N Fernández
Rafael González
María J Solana
Jorge López
Javier Urbano
Jesús López-Herce
author_sort Gema Manrique
title Comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.
title_short Comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.
title_full Comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.
title_fullStr Comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.
title_sort comparison between synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation and between guided and non-guided chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model after asphyxial cardiac arrest.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description <h4>Introduction</h4>There are no studies comparing synchronized and non-synchronized ventilation with bag-valve mask ventilation (BVMV) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in pediatric patients. The main aim is to compare between synchronized and non-synchronized BVMV with chest compressions (CC), and between guided and non-guided CC with a real-time feedback-device in a pediatric animal model of asphyxial cardiac arrest (CA). The secondary aim is to analyze the quality of CC during resuscitation.<h4>Methods</h4>60 piglets were randomized for CPR into four groups: Group A: guided-CC and synchronized ventilation; Group B: guided-CC and non-synchronized ventilation; Group C: non-guided CC and synchronized ventilation; Group D: non-guided CC and non-synchronized ventilation. Return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hemodynamic and respiratory parameters, and quality of CC were compared between all groups.<h4>Results</h4>60 piglets were included. Twenty-six (46.5%) achieved ROSC: A (46.7%), B (66.7%), C (26.7%) and D (33.3%). Survival rates were higher in group B than in groups A+C+D (66.7% vs 35.6%, p = 0.035). ROSC was higher with guided-CC (A+B 56.7% vs C+D 30%, p = 0.037). Piglets receiving non-synchronized ventilation did not show different rates of ROSC than synchronized ventilation (B+D 50% vs A+C 36.7%, p = 0.297). Non-synchronized groups showed lower arterial pCO2 after 3 minutes of CPR than synchronized groups: 57 vs 71 mmHg, p = 0.019. No differences were found in arterial pH and pO2, mean arterial pressure (MAP) or cerebral blood flow between groups. Chest compressions were shallower in surviving than in non-surviving piglets (4.7 vs 5.1 cm, p = 0.047). There was a negative correlation between time without CC and MAP (r = -0.35, p = 0.038).<h4>Conclusions</h4>The group receiving non-synchronized ventilation and guided-CC obtained significantly higher ROSC rates than the other modalities of resuscitation. Guided-CC achieved higher ROSC rates than non-guided CC. Non-synchronized ventilation was associated with better ventilation parameters, with no differences in hemodynamics or cerebral flow.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219660
work_keys_str_mv AT gemamanrique comparisonbetweensynchronizedandnonsynchronizedventilationandbetweenguidedandnonguidedchestcompressionsduringresuscitationinapediatricanimalmodelafterasphyxialcardiacarrest
AT miriamgarcia comparisonbetweensynchronizedandnonsynchronizedventilationandbetweenguidedandnonguidedchestcompressionsduringresuscitationinapediatricanimalmodelafterasphyxialcardiacarrest
AT sarahnfernandez comparisonbetweensynchronizedandnonsynchronizedventilationandbetweenguidedandnonguidedchestcompressionsduringresuscitationinapediatricanimalmodelafterasphyxialcardiacarrest
AT rafaelgonzalez comparisonbetweensynchronizedandnonsynchronizedventilationandbetweenguidedandnonguidedchestcompressionsduringresuscitationinapediatricanimalmodelafterasphyxialcardiacarrest
AT mariajsolana comparisonbetweensynchronizedandnonsynchronizedventilationandbetweenguidedandnonguidedchestcompressionsduringresuscitationinapediatricanimalmodelafterasphyxialcardiacarrest
AT jorgelopez comparisonbetweensynchronizedandnonsynchronizedventilationandbetweenguidedandnonguidedchestcompressionsduringresuscitationinapediatricanimalmodelafterasphyxialcardiacarrest
AT javierurbano comparisonbetweensynchronizedandnonsynchronizedventilationandbetweenguidedandnonguidedchestcompressionsduringresuscitationinapediatricanimalmodelafterasphyxialcardiacarrest
AT jesuslopezherce comparisonbetweensynchronizedandnonsynchronizedventilationandbetweenguidedandnonguidedchestcompressionsduringresuscitationinapediatricanimalmodelafterasphyxialcardiacarrest
_version_ 1714805995018911744