Corpuls CPR Generates Higher Mean Arterial Pressure Than LUCAS II in a Pig Model of Cardiac Arrest

The role of sequential normothermic regional perfusion and end-ischemic normothermic machine perfusion in liver transplantation from very extended uncontrolled donation after cardiocirculatory death

The use of pre-procurement normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) allowed us to implement controlled DCD liver transplantation with results comparable to brain death donors, but the use of uncontrolled DCD is declining due to logistic challenges and the high incidence of post-transplant complications. In Italy, the mandatory stand-off period of 20 min for DCD donors has driven the combined use of NRP and ex-situ machine perfusion with the intent to counterbalance the negative impact of prolonged warm ischemia. Organ viability during NRP is based on duration of warm ischemia, regional perfusion flow, lactate, transaminases values and histology, and those used in Italy are the widest worldwide. However, this evaluation can be difficult, especially when the acute damage is particularly severe. The use of ex-situ NRP could provide a safe organ evaluation. In the period from 06/2020 to 06/2022, all DCD grafts exceeding NRP viability criteria at a single center were eventually evaluated using ex-situ normothermic machine perfusion. Machine perfusion viability criteria were based on lactate clearance, irrespectively to bile production, unless 1-h transaminases perfusate level were not exceeding 5000 IU/L. Three cases of uncontrolled DCD grafts in excess of NRP viability criteria underwent ex-situ graft evaluation. Two matched ex-situ normothermic machine perfusion viability criteria and were successfully transplanted. Both recipients are doing well after 26 and 5 months after surgery with no signs of ischemic cholangiopathy. This experience suggests that the sequential use of NRP and normothermic machine perfusion may further expand the boundaries of organ viability in uncontrolled DCD liver transplantation.

Percutaneous Thrombectomy in Patients with Occlusions of the Aortoiliac Segment: A Case Series

OBJECTIVE

Thrombectomy of the aortoiliac segment remains a challenge for surgical and endovascular revision. This study aimed to evaluate the concept of percutaneous thrombectomy in patients with aortoiliac segment occlusions.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Eighteen patients with aortoiliac occlusion who underwent percutaneous thrombectomy were retrospectively identified using the local picture archive and divided into the stent-graft (N = 10) and native vessels (N  =  8) groups. The procedure was performed by placing a 12-24 French sheath adjacent to the distal end of the occluded vessel segment. The occlusion was passed with a balloon catheter which was retracted after inflation, to deliver the thrombus into the sheath. Technical success (reperfusion of the vessel and no residual thrombus/stenosis < 30%), complications and primary arterial patency were assessed. Follow-up included computed tomography angiography and evaluation of the clinical situation via telephone.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 38% (7/18) of patients after percutaneous thrombectomy alone and in 100% after additional procedures. The most common complication was peripheral embolism (44%, 8/18), which was treated successfully in all cases and was linked to a mismatch between the sheath and target vessel of ≥ 1 mm (P < .01). There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications between the two groups. Primary patency was 72% (13/18) with no significant difference between groups (P  =  .94). Follow-up CT scans were available for 13/18 patients (72%), with a mean follow-up time of 270  ±  146 days. All patients were contacted via phone (follow-up time, 653  ±  264 days).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous thrombectomy appears to be effective for revascularization of the aortoiliac segment, both in stent-grafts and in native vessels. The most common complication is peripheral embolism; however, the risk may be reduced by choosing an adequate sheath size.

Use of Robots in Critical Care: Systematic Review

Background

The recent focus on the critical setting, especially with the COVID-19 pandemic, has highlighted the need for minimizing contact-based care and increasing robotic use. Robotics is a rising field in the context of health care, and we sought to evaluate the use of robots in critical care settings.

Objective

Although robotic presence is prevalent in the surgical setting, its role in critical care has not been well established. We aimed to examine the uses and limitations of robots for patients who are critically ill.

Methods

This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Library were searched from their inception to December 23, 2021. Included studies involved patients requiring critical care, both in intensive care units or high-dependency units, or settings that required critical care procedures (eg, intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Randomized trials and observational studies were included.

Results

A total of 33 studies were included. The greatest application of robots in the intensive care unit was in the field of telepresence, whereby robots proved advantageous in providing a reduced response time, earlier intervention, and lower mortality rates. Challenges of telepresence included regulatory and financial barriers. In therapy and stroke rehabilitation, robots achieved superior clinical outcomes safely. Robotic use in patient evaluation and assessment was mainly through ultrasound evaluation, obtaining satisfactory to superior results with the added benefits of remote assessment, time savings, and increased efficiency. Robots in drug dispensing and delivery increased efficiency and generated cost savings. All the robots had technological limitations and hidden costs.

Conclusions

Overall, our results show that robotic use in critical care settings is a beneficial, effective, and well-received intervention that delivers significant benefits to patients, staff, and hospitals. Looking ahead, it is necessary to form strong ethical and legislative frameworks and overcome various regulatory and financial barriers.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021234162; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=234162

Standardized post-resuscitation damage assessment of two mechanical chest compression devices: a prospective randomized large animal trial

BACKGROUND

Mechanical chest compression devices are accepted alternatives for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) under specific circumstances. Current devices lack prospective and comparative data on their specific cardiovascular effects and potential for severe thoracic injuries.

OBJECTIVES

To compare CPR effectiveness and thoracic injuries of two mechanical chest compression devices in pigs.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective randomised trial.

ANIMALS

Eighteen male German landrace pigs.

METHODS

Ventricular fibrillation was induced in anaesthetised and instrumented pigs and the animals were randomised into two intervention groups. Mechanical CPR was initiated by means of LUCAS™ 2 (mCCD1) or Corpuls™ cpr (mCCD2) device. Advanced life support was applied for a maximum of 10 cycles and animals achieving ROSC were monitored for 8 h. Ventilation/perfusion measurements were performed and blood gas analyses were taken. Thoracic injuries were assessed via a standardised damage score.

RESULTS

Five animals of the mCCD1 group and one animal of the mCCD2 group achieved ROSC (p = 0.048). Only the mCCD1 animals survived until the end of the monitoring period (p < 0.01). MCCD1 animals showed less pulmonary shunt (p = 0.025) and higher normal V/Q (p = 0.017) during CPR. MCCD2 animals showed significantly more severe thoracic injuries (p = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

The LUCAS 2 device shows superior resuscitation outcomes and less thoracic injuries compared to Corpuls cpr when used for experimental CPR in juvenile pigs. Researchers should be aware that different mCCDs for experimental studies may significantly influence the respective outcome of resuscitation studies and affect comparability of different trials. Controlled human and animal CPR studies and a standardised post-resuscitation injury evaluation could help to confirm potential hazards.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial approval number: G16-1-042-E4.

Differences between manual CPR and corpuls cpr in regard to quality and outcome: study protocol of the comparing observational multi-center prospective registry study on resuscitation (COMPRESS)

Background

The effect of mechanical CPR is diversely described in the literature. Different mechanical CPR devices are available. The corpuls cpr is a new generation of piston-driven devices and was launched in 2015. The COMPRESS-trial analyzes quality of chest compression and CPR-related injuries in cases of mechanical CPR by the corpuls cpr and manual CPR.

Methods

This article describes the design and study protocol of the COMPRESS-trial. This observational multi-center study includes all patients who suffered an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) where CPR is attempted in four German emergency medical systems (EMS) between January 2020 and December 2022. EMS treatment, in-hospital-treatment and outcome are anonymously reported to the German Resuscitation Registry (GRR). This information is linked with data from the defibrillator, the feedback system and the mechanical CPR device for a complete dataset.

Primary endpoint is chest compression quality (complete release, compression rate, compression depth, chest compression fraction, CPR-related injuries). Secondary endpoint is survival (return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), admission to hospital and survival to hospital discharge). The trial is sponsored by GS Elektromedizinische Geräte G. Stemple GmbH.

Discussion

This observational multi-center study will contribute to the evaluation of mechanical chest compression devices and to the efficacy and safety of the corpuls cpr.

Trial registration

DRKS, DRKS-ID DRKS00020819. Registered 31 July 2020.

Sequential Use of Normothermic Regional and Ex Situ Machine Perfusion in Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplant

In Italy, 20 minutes of a continuous flat line on an electrocardiogram are required for declaration of death. In the setting of donation after circulatory death (DCD), prolonged warm ischemia time prompted the introduction of abdominal normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) followed by postprocurement ex situ machine perfusion (MP). This is a retrospective review of DCD liver transplantations (LTs) performed at 2 centers using sequential NRP and ex situ MP. From January 2018 to April 2019, 34 DCD donors were evaluated. Three (8.8%) were discarded before NRP, and 11 (32.4%) were discarded based on NRP parameters (n = 1, 3.0%), liver macroscopic appearance at procurement and/or biopsy results (n = 9, 26.5%), or severe macroangiopathy at back-table evaluation (n = 1, 3.0%). A total of 20 grafts (58.8%; 11 uncontrolled DCDs, 9 controlled DCDs) were considered eligible for LT, procured and perfused ex situ (9 normothermic and 11 dual hypothermic MPs). In total, 18 (52.9%; 11 uncontrolled) livers were eventually transplanted. Median (interquartile range) no-flow time was 32.5 (30-39) minutes, whereas median functional warm ischemia time was 52.5 (47-74) minutes (controlled DCD), and median low-flow time was 112 minutes (105-129 minutes; uncontrolled DCD). There was no primary nonfunction, while postreperfusion syndrome occurred in 8 (44%) recipients. Early allograft dysfunction happened in 5 (28%) patients, while acute kidney injury occurred in 5 (28%). After a median follow-up of 15.1 (9.5-22.3) months, 1 case of ischemic-type biliary lesions and 1 patient death were reported. DCD LT is feasible even with the 20-minute no-touch rule. Strict NRP and ex situ MP selection criteria are needed to optimize postoperative results.

Resuscitation of the patient with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 when wearing personal protective equipment: A randomized multicenter crossover simulation trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to evaluate various methods of chest compressions in patients with suspected/confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conducted by medical students wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE) for aerosol generating procedures (AGP).

METHODS

This was prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, crossover simulation trial. Thirty-five medical students after an advanced cardiovascular life support course, which included performing 2-min continuous chest compression scenarios using three methods: (A) manual chest compression (CC), (B) compression with CPRMeter, (C) compression with LifeLine ARM device. During resuscitation they are wearing full personal protective equipment for aerosol generating procedures.

RESULTS

The median chest compression depth using manual CC, CPRMeter and LifeLine ARM varied and amounted to 40 (38-45) vs. 45 (40-50) vs. 51 (50-52) mm, respectively (p = 0.002). The median chest compression rate was 109 (IQR; 102-131) compressions per minute (CPM) for manual CC, 107 (105-127) CPM for CPRMeter, and 102 (101-102) CPM for LifeLine ARM (p = 0.027). The percentage of correct chest recoil was the highest for LifeLine ARM - 100% (95-100), 80% (60-90) in CPRMeter group, and the lowest for manual CC - 29% (26-48).

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of this simulation trial, automated chest compression devices (ACCD) should be used for chest compression of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. In the absence of ACCD, it seems reasonable to change the cardiopulmonary resuscitation algorithm (in the context of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19) by reducing the duration of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation cycle from the current 2-min to 1-min cycles due to a statistically significant reduction in the quality of chest compressions among rescuers wearing PPE AGP.