Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Hospital Survival Among Adult Patients With Nontraumatic Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Attending the Emergency Department: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study in Japan (SOS-KANTO [Survey of Survivors after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Kanto Area] 2012 Study)

Comparison of manual chest compression versus mechanical chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a life-threatening condition that requires immediate intervention to increase the prospect of survival. There are various ways to achieve cardiopulmonary resuscitation in such patients, either through manual chest compression or mechanical chest compression. Thus, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the differences between these interventions.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were explored from inception to May 2023. Additionally, the bibliographies of relevant studies were searched. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies-I tools were utilized to perform quality and risk of bias assessments.

RESULTS

There were 24 studies included within this quantitative synthesis, featuring a total of 111,681 cardiac arrest patients. Overall, no statistically significant differences were observed between the return of spontaneous circulation, survival to hospital discharge, short-term survival, and long-term survival. However, manual chest compression was associated with a significantly superior favorability of neurological outcomes (OR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.84; P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Although there were no major differences between the strategies, the poorer post-resuscitation neurological outcomes observed in mechanical chest compression indicate the need for further innovation and advancements within the current array of mechanical devices. However, future high-quality studies are necessary in order to arrive at a valid conclusion.

Characteristics and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in a hilly area: Utstein Registry data from the Nagasaki Medical Region, Japan

Aim

To analyze characteristics and investigate prognostic indicators of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in a hilly area in Japan.

Methods

A retrospective population-based study was conducted using the Utstein Registry for 4280 OHCA patients in the Nagasaki Medical Region (NMR) registered over the 10-year period from 2011 to 2020. The main outcome measure was a favorable cerebral performance category (CPC 1-2). Sites at which OHCA occurred were classified into "sloped places (SPs)" (not easily accessible by emergency medical services [EMS] personnel due to slopes) and "accessible places (APs)" (EMS personnel could park an ambulance close to the site). The characteristics and prognosis based on CPC were compared between SPs and APs, and multivariable analysis was performed.

Results

No significant improvement in prognosis occurred in the NMR from 2011 to 2020. Prognosis in SPs was significantly worse than that in APs. However, multivariable analysis did not identify SP as a prognostic indicator. The following factors were associated with survival and CPC 1-2: age group, witness status, first documented rhythm, bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED) use, use of mechanical CPR (m-CPR) device or esophageal obturator airway (EOA), and year. Both m-CPR and EOA use were associated with a poor prognosis.

Conclusion

In a hilly area, OHCA patients in SPs had a worse prognosis than those in APs, but SPs was not significantly associated with prognosis by multivariable analysis. Interventions to increase bystander-initiated CPR and AED use could potentially improve outcomes of OHCA in the NMR.

Cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation in “hostile” environments: Using automated compression devices to minimize the rescuers’ danger

Mechanical automated compression devices are being used in cardiopulmonary resuscitation instead of manual, “hands-on”, rescuer-delivered chest compressions. The -theoretical- advantages include high-quality non-stop compressions, thus freeing the rescuer performing the compressions and additionally the ability of the rescuer to stand reasonably away from a potentially “hazardous” victim, or from hazardous and/or difficult resuscitation conditions. Such circumstances involve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory, especially directly under the fluoroscopy panel, where radiation is well known to cause detrimental effects to the rescuer, and CPR during/after land or air transportation of cardiac arrest victims. Lastly, CPR in a coronavirus disease 2019 patient/ward, where the danger of contamination and further serious illness of the health provider is very existent. The scope of this review is to review and present literature and current guidelines regarding the use of mechanical compressions in these “hostile” and dangerous settings, while comparing them to manual compressions.

Corticosteroid use with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A nationwide observational study

Aim

Several studies have reported that corticosteroid administration for cardiac arrest patients may improve outcomes. However, these previous studies have not examined the effect of corticosteroid use in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients administered extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Therefore, we aimed to examine the effectiveness of corticosteroids in OHCA patients administered ECPR.

Methods

Using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination inpatient database, we included OHCA patients who were administered ECPR on the day of admission between July 2010 and March 2019. The patients were categorized into the corticosteroid and control groups according to whether they received corticosteroids on the day of admission or not. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcomes included percentages of neurologically favorable survival, major bleeding complications, and infection-related complications. We compared the outcomes using a propensity score matching analysis.

Results

We identified 6,142 eligible patients (459 vs 5,683, the corticosteroid and control group, respectively). One-to-four propensity score matching analysis (457 vs 1,827) showed in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the corticosteroid group compared with the control group (82.1% vs 76.6%; risk difference, 5.5%; 95% CI, 1.5 to 9.5%). Neurologically favorable outcomes did not differ between the two groups (13.6% vs 16.9%; risk difference, −3.3%; 95% CI, −6.9 to 0.3%). The percentage of major bleeding complications and infection-related complications did not significantly differ between the two groups.

Conclusions

The results of this study demonstrated that administration of corticosteroids on the day of admission to OHCA patients administered ECPR was associated with increased in-hospital mortality.

Comparison of Sustained Return of Spontaneous Circulation Rate Between Manual and Mechanical Chest Compression in Adult Cardiac Arrest

Objective

This study aimed to compare the rates of sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) between manual and mechanical chest compression in adult non-traumatic cardiac arrest.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2017 to 2019. The medical records were reviewed in 227 cardiac arrest patients aged ≥18 years who experienced out-of-hospital cardiac arrest or cardiac arrest while visiting the emergency department (ED). The patients were divided into manual chest compression and mechanical chest compression groups. The two groups were compared in terms of baseline characteristics, time to arrive at the ED, time to basic life support, initial rhythm, time to defibrillation in the shockable group, time to the first dose of adrenaline, and possible cause of arrest. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the factors associated with ROSC.

Results

A total of 227 patients met the inclusion criteria:193 patients in the manual chest compression group and 34 patients in the mechanical chest compression group. The rate of sustained ROSC in the manual chest compression group was higher (43% vs 8.8%; P < 0.001). The significant factors associated with ROSC were witnessed cardiac arrest (odds ratio (OR) = 3.41; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94–12.4), ED arrival by basic ambulance service (OR = 1.93; 95% CI 0.86–4.35), cardiac arrest at the ED (OR = 3.69; 95% CI 1.73–7.88), and cardiac arrest from hypoxia (OR = 2.01; 95% CI 1.02–3.97).

Conclusion

Mechanical chest compression was not associated with sustained ROSC and tended to be selectively used in patients with a prolonged duration of cardiac arrest.

Eleven-year retrospective study characterizing patients with severe brain damage and poor neurological prognosis -role of physicians' attitude toward life-sustaining treatment

Background

Severe brain hemorrhage/infarction and cardiac arrest constitute the most critical situations leading to poor neurological prognosis. Characterization of these patients is required to offer successful end-of-life care, but actual practice is affected by multiple confounding factors, including ethicolegal issues, particular in Japan and Asia. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical courses of patients with severe brain damage and to assess the preference of end-of-life care for these patients in Japanese hospitals.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was conducted between 2008 and 2018. All intracranial hemorrhage/infarction and cardiac arrest out-patients (n = 510) who were admitted to our two affiliated hospitals and survived but with poor neurologic outcomes were included. Demographic characteristics as well as prognosis and treatment policies were also assessed.

Results

Patients were divided into two categories; cases with absent brainstem reflex (BSR) (BSR[-]) and those with preserved BSR (BSR[ +]). The survival rate was higher and the length of hospitalization was longer in patients with BSR[ +] than in those with BSR[-]. Among three life-sustaining policies (i.e., aggressive treatment, withdrawal of treatment, and withholding of treatment), withholding of treatment was adopted to most patients. In BSR[-], the proportion of three treatment policies performed at the final decision did not differ from that at the initial diagnosis on neurological status (p = 0.432). In contrast, this proportion tended to be altered in BSR[ +] (p = 0.072), with a decreasing tendency of aggressive treatment and a modest increasing tendency of withdrawal of treatment. Furthermore, the requests from patients’ families to withdraw life-sustaining treatment, including discontinuation of mechanical ventilation, increased, but actual implementation of withdrawal by physicians was less than half of the requests.

Conclusions

BSR constitutes a crucial determinant of mortality and length of hospitalization in comatose patients with severe brain damage. Although the number of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment tends to increase over time in BSR[ +] patients, there are many more requests from patients’ families for withdrawal. Since physicians has a tendency to desist from withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, more in-depth communication between medical staff and patients’ families will facilitate mutual understanding over ethicolegal and religious issues and may thus improve end-of-life care.

Comparison between Prehospital Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Devices and Manual CPR for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis

In pre-hospital settings, efficient cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is challenging; therefore, the application of mechanical CPR devices continues to increase. However, the evidence of the benefits of using mechanical CPR devices in pre-hospital settings for adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is controversial. This meta-analysis compared the effects of mechanical and manual CPR applied in the pre-hospital stage on clinical outcomes after OHCA. Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception until October 2021. Studies comparing mechanical and manual CPR applied in the pre-hospital stage for survival outcomes of adult OHCA were eligible. Data abstraction, quality assessment, meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis (TSA), and grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation were conducted. Seven randomized controlled and 15 observational studies were included. Compared to manual CPR, pre-hospital use of mechanical CPR showed a positive effect in achieving return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to admission. No difference was found in survival to discharge and discharge with favorable neurological status, with inconclusive results in TSA. In conclusion, pre-hospital use of mechanical CPR devices may benefit adult OHCA in achieving ROSC and survival to admission. With low certainty of evidence, more well-designed large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings.

Prognostic Impact of In-Hospital Use of Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Devices Compared with Manual Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Nationwide Population-Based Observational Study in South Korea

Background and Objectives: This study analyzed the prognostic impact of mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) devices in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, in comparison to manual CPR. Materials and Methods: This study was a nationwide population-based observational study in South Korea. Data were retrospectively collected from 142,905 OHCA patients using the South Korean Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Surveillance database. We included adult OHCA patients who received manual or mechanical CPR in the emergency room. The primary outcome was survival at discharge and the secondary outcome was sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Statistical analysis included propensity score matching and multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 19,045 manual CPR and 1125 mechanical CPR cases (671 AutoPulse^TM vs. 305 Thumper^TM vs. 149 LUCAS^TM) were included. In the matched multivariate analyses, all mechanical CPR devices were associated with a lower ROSC than that of manual CPR. AutoPulse^TM was associated with lower survival in the multivariate analysis after matching (aOR with 95% CI: 0.57 (0.33–0.96)), but the other mechanical CPR devices were associated with similar survival to discharge as that of manual CPR. Witnessed arrest was commonly associated with high ROSC, but the use of mechanical CPR devices and cardiac origin arrest were associated with low ROSC. Only target temperature management was the common predictor for high survival. Conclusions: The mechanical CPR devices largely led to similar survival to discharge as that of manual CPR in OHCA patients; however, the in-hospital use of the AutoPulse^TM device for mechanical CPR may significantly lower survival compared to manual CPR.

Early mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation can improve outcomes in patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest in the emergency department

Objective

To compare the outcomes of patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest (CA) who received early versus late mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with the Lund University Cardiac Assist System (LUCAS) device in the emergency department (ED).

Methods

This was a retrospective observational study in the ED of a single medical center performed from May 2018 to December 2019; 68 patients with CA were eligible. We grouped the patients according to the time to initiating LUCAS use after CA into an early group (≤4 minutes) and late group (>4 minutes).

Results

The rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was higher in the early group vs the late group (69.2% vs 52.4%, respectively). The 4-hour survival rate was significantly higher in the early group vs the late group (83.3% vs 45.5%, respectively), and CPR duration was significantly shorter in the early group (23.3 ± 12.5 vs 31.1 ± 14.8 minutes, respectively).

Conclusion

Early mechanical CPR can improve the success of achieving ROSC and the 4-hour survival rate in patients with non-traumatic CA in the ED, considering that more benefits were observed in patients who received early vs late LUCAS device therapy.

Five Hours of Resuscitation With 150 Electrical Shocks and Complete Recovery

Background: Myocardial ischemia may lead to lethal arrhythmias. Treatment of these arrhythmias without addressing the cause of ischemia may be futile. The length of resuscitation is an important parameter for determining when to stop resuscitation but with shockable rhythms and reversible cause of the cardiac arrest, the decision to terminate resuscitation is complex. 

Case Summary: A patient with a three-month history of shortness of breath with effort developed pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT) at the early stages of a stress test. In coronary angiography, a critical lesion in the right coronary artery (RCA) was observed and treated with two stents. During the procedure and for a total of five hours, the patient had more than 100 separate episodes of VT and ventricular fibrillation (VF) that were treated by 150 defibrillations, artificial ventilation, intra-aortic counter-pulsation balloon insertion, and multiple drugs. One hour after the initial stenting procedure, thrombosis of the RCA was demonstrated and treated successfully with angioplasty. Use of procainamide resolved the arrhythmias and the patient recovered completely without neurological deficit, ejection fraction of 45%, and is asymptomatic at one year following the event.

Discussion: Our case shows that with a revisable cause of cardiac arrest, resuscitation should be directed at maintaining perfusion of essential organs and treating the reversible cause. Without re-opening the RCA, we could not have saved the patient's life. The use of an extracorporeal membrane oxygenator, if available, should be considered in similar cases. Finally, the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation determines the neurological outcome regardless of the length of resuscitation, as was evident in our patient who recovered completely.

The Effect of Implementing Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Devices on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients in an Urban City of Taiwan

High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a key element in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) resuscitation. Mechanical CPR devices have been developed to provide uninterrupted and high-quality CPR. Although human studies have shown controversial results in favor of mechanical CPR devices, their application in pre-hospital settings continues to increase. There remains scant data on the pre-hospital use of mechanical CPR devices in Asia. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective cohort study between September 2018 and August 2020 in an urban city of Taiwan to analyze the effects of mechanical CPR devices on the outcomes of OHCA; the primary outcome was attainment of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Of 552 patients with OHCA, 279 received mechanical CPR and 273 received manual CPR, before being transferred to the hospital. After multivariate adjustment for the influencing factors, mechanical CPR was independently associated with achievement of any ROSC (OR = 1.871; 95%CI:1.195–2.930) and sustained (≥24 h) ROSC (OR = 2.353; 95%CI:1.427–3.879). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that mechanical CPR is beneficial in shorter emergency medical service response time (≤4 min), witnessed cardiac arrest, and non-shockable cardiac rhythm. These findings support the importance of early EMS activation and high-quality CPR in OHCA resuscitation.

Manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Which one is more effective during ambulance transport?

OBJECTIVES:

Although studies in the field of emergency medical services (EMS) generally compare survival and hospital discharge rates, there are not many studies measuring the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). In this study, we aimed to compare the mechanical chest compression device and paramedics in terms of CPR quality.

METHODS:

This is an experimental trial. This study was performed by the EMS of Ankara city (capital of Turkey). Twenty (ten males and ten females) paramedics participated in the study. We used LUCAS™ 2 as a mechanical chest compression device in the study. Paramedics applied chest compression in twenty rounds, whereas mechanical chest compression device applied chest compression in another set of twenty rounds. The depth, rate, and hands-off time of chest compression were measured by means of the model's recording system.

RESULTS:

The median chest compression rate was 120.1 compressions per minute (interquartile range [IQR]: 25%–75% = 117.9–133.5) for the paramedics, whereas it was 102.3 compressions per minute for the mechanical chest compression device (IQR: 25%–75% = 102.1–102.7) (P < 0.001). The median chest compression depth was 38.9 mm (IQR: 25%–75% = 32.9–45.5) for the paramedics, whereas it was 52.7 mm for the mechanical chest compression device (IQR: 25%–75% = 51.8–55.0) (P < 0.001). The median hands-off time during CPR was 6.9% (IQR: 25–75 = 5.0%–10.1%) for the paramedics and 9% for the mechanical chest compression device (IQR: 25%–75% = 8.2%–12.5%) (P = 0.09).

CONCLUSION:

During patient transport, according to the chest compression performed by the health-care professionals, it was found that those performed by the mechanical chest compression device were more suitable than that performed by the guides in terms of both speed and duration.

Metrics of mechanical chest compression device use in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

OBJECTIVE

The quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) affects outcomes from cardiac arrest, yet manual CPR is difficult to administer. Although mechanical CPR (mCPR) devices offer high quality CPR, only limited data describe their deployment, their interaction with standard manual CPR (sCPR), and the consequent effects on chest compression continuity and patient outcomes. We sought to describe the interaction between sCPR and mCPR and the impact of the sCPR-mCPR transition upon outcomes in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).

METHODS

We analyzed all adult ventricular fibrillation OHCA treated by the Anchorage Fire Department (AFD) during calendar year 2016. AFD protocols include the immediate initiation of sCPR upon rescuer arrival and transition to mCPR, guided by patient status. We compared CPR timing, performance, and outcomes between those receiving sCPR only and those receiving sCPR transitioning to mCPR (sCPR + mCPR).

RESULTS

All 19 sCPR-only patients achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after a median of 3.3 (interquartile range 2.2-5.1) minutes. Among 30 patients remaining pulseless after sCPR (median 6.9 [5.3-11.0] minutes), transition to mCPR occurred with a median chest compression interruption of 7 (5-13) seconds. Twenty-one of 30 sCPR + mCPR patients achieved ROSC after a median of 11.2 (5.7-23.8) additional minutes of mCPR. Survival differed between groups: sCPR only 14/19 (74%) versus sCPR + mCPR 13/30 (43%), P = 0.045.

CONCLUSION

In this series, transition to mCPR occurred in patients unresponsive to initial sCPR with only brief interruptions in chest compressions. Assessment of mCPR must consider the interactions with sCPR.

Quality Comparison of the Manual Chest Compression and the Mechanical Chest Compression During Difficult Transport Conditions

BACKGROUND

Although there are several studies comparing the quality of manual and mechanical chest compressions, we decided to conduct this study because results of previous studies were not sufficient for us to arrive at a definite conclusion.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, our goal was to evaluate the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed manually and by mechanical chest compression device (MCCD) when removing out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients from their homes via stairs.

METHODS

A total of 20 paramedics participated in the study. The patient simulator manikin was moved down the stairs while each of 20 paramedics performed chest compressions, then it was moved down the stairs again 20 times while the MCCD performed chest compressions. Compression depth, compression rate, and hands-on times were recorded and the data were compared.

RESULTS

The median chest compression rate was 142.0 compressions/min (interquartile [25^th to 75^th percentile] range [IQR] 134.9-148.7 compressions/min) for the paramedics and 102.3 compressions/min for the MCCD (IQR 102.2-102.5 compressions/min) (p < 0.01). The median chest compression depth was 25.2 mm (IQR 23.2-30.9 mm) for the paramedics and 52.0 mm for the MCCD (IQR 51.4-52.6 mm) (p < 0.001). The rate of hands-on time for chest compressions performed by the paramedic participants was 92.0% (IQR 86.5-100%). Hands-on rate of the MCCD was 100% (p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, while carrying the patient simulator manikin to the lower floor, it was found that the MCCD achieved high-quality CPR targets recommended by resuscitation guidelines in terms of compression rate, depth, and hands-on-time.

Mechanical, Team-Focused, Video-Reviewed Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Improves Return of Spontaneous Circulation After Emergency Department Implementation

Background

Outcomes in cardiac arrest remain suboptimal. Mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has not demonstrated clear clinical benefit; however, video review provides the capability to monitor CPR quality and provide constructive feedback to individuals and teams to improve their performance. The aim of our study was to evaluate cardiac arrest outcomes before and after initiation of a mechanical, team‐focused, video‐reviewed CPR intervention.

Methods and Results

In 2018, our emergency department began using mechanical CPR; a new team‐focused strategy with nurse‐led Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support; and biweekly, multidisciplinary video review of cardiac arrests. A revised approach to resuscitation was generated from a performance improvement session, and in situ simulation was used to disseminate our approach. The primary outcome of this study was the return of spontaneous circulation rate before and after our mechanical, team‐focused, video‐reviewed CPR intervention. Secondary outcomes included survival to admission and discharge. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used. The pre‐ and postintervention groups were similar at baseline. A total of 248 patients were included in our study (97 before and 151 after mechanical, team‐focused, video‐reviewed CPR). Return of spontaneous circulation was higher in the intervention group (41% versus 26%; P=0.014). There were nonsignificant increases in survival to admission (26% versus 20%; P=0.257) and survival to discharge (7% versus 3%; P=0.163). After controlling for covariates, the odds of return of spontaneous circulation remained higher after the intervention (odds ratio, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.14–3.89).

Conclusions

Implementation of our mechanical, team‐focused, video‐reviewed CPR intervention for cardiac arrest patients in our emergency department improved return of spontaneous circulation rates. Survival to hospital admission and discharge did not improve.

A meta-analysis of the resuscitative effects of mechanical and manual chest compression in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients

Objectives

To evaluate the resuscitative effects of mechanical and manual chest compression in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).

Methods

All randomized controlled and cohort studies comparing the effects of mechanical compression and manual compression on cardiopulmonary resuscitation in OHCA patients were retrieved from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Ovid databases from the date of their establishment to January 14, 2019. The included outcomes were as follows: the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate, the rate of survival to hospital admission, the rate of survival to hospital discharge, and neurological function. After evaluating the quality of the studies and summarizing the results, RevMan5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis.

Results

In total, 15 studies (9 randomized controlled trials and 6 cohort studies) were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in the resuscitative effects of mechanical and manual chest compression in terms of the ROSC rate, the rate of survival to hospital admission and survival to hospital discharge, and neurological function in OHCA patients (ROSC: RCT: OR = 1.12, 95% CI (0.90, 1.39), P = 0.31; cohort study: OR = 1.08, 95% CI (0.85, 1.36), P = 0.54; survival to hospital admission: RCT: OR = 0.95, 95% CI (0.75, 1.20), P = 0.64; cohort study: OR = 0.98 95% CI (0.79, 1.20), P = 0.82; survival to hospital discharge: RCT: OR = 0.87, 95% CI (0.68, 1.10), P = 0.24; cohort study: OR = 0.78, 95% CI (0.53, 1.16), P = 0.22; Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) score: RCT: OR = 0.88, 95% CI (0.64, 1.20), P = 0.41; cohort study: OR = 0.68, 95% CI (0.34, 1.37), P = 0.28). When the mechanical compression group was divided into Lucas and Autopulse subgroups, the Lucas subgroup showed no difference from the manual compression group in ROSC, survival to admission, survival to discharge, and CPC scores; the Autopulse subgroup showed no difference from the manual compression subgroup in ROSC, survival to discharge, and CPC scores.

Conclusion

There were no significant differences in resuscitative effects between mechanical and manual chest compression in OHCA patients. To ensure the quality of CPR, we suggest that manual chest compression be applied in the early stage of CPR for OHCA patients, while mechanical compression can be used as part of advanced life support in the late stage.

Mechanical CPR: Who? When? How?

In cardiac arrest, high quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a key determinant of patient survival. However, delivery of effective chest compressions is often inconsistent, subject to fatigue and practically challenging.

Mechanical CPR devices provide an automated way to deliver high-quality CPR. However, large randomised controlled trials of the routine use of mechanical devices in the out-of-hospital setting have found no evidence of improved patient outcome in patients treated with mechanical CPR, compared with manual CPR. The limited data on use during in-hospital cardiac arrest provides preliminary data supporting use of mechanical devices, but this needs to be robustly tested in randomised controlled trials.

In situations where high-quality manual chest compressions cannot be safely delivered, the use of a mechanical device may be a reasonable clinical approach. Examples of such situations include ambulance transportation, primary percutaneous coronary intervention, as a bridge to extracorporeal CPR and to facilitate uncontrolled organ donation after circulatory death.

The precise time point during a cardiac arrest at which to deploy a mechanical device is uncertain, particularly in patients presenting in a shockable rhythm. The deployment process requires interruptions in chest compression, which may be harmful if the pause is prolonged. It is recommended that use of mechanical devices should occur only in systems where quality assurance mechanisms are in place to monitor and manage pauses associated with deployment.

In summary, mechanical CPR devices may provide a useful adjunct to standard treatment in specific situations, but current evidence does not support their routine use.