CPR in the Netherlands and in Europe —stay with the old or follow the new ? —

A CIRCULATION-FIRST APPROACH FOR RESUSCITATION OF TRAUMA PATIENTS WITH HEMORRHAGIC SHOCK

ABSTRACT

The original guidelines of cardiopulmonary resuscitation focused on the establishment of an airway and rescue breathing before restoration of circulation through cardiopulmonary resuscitation. As a result, the airway-breathing-circulation approach became the central guiding principle of resuscitation. Despite new guidelines by the American Heart Association for a circulation-first approach, Advanced Trauma Life Support guidelines continue to advocate for the airway-breathing-circulation sequence. Although definitive airway management is often necessary for severely injured patients, endotracheal intubation (ETI) before resuscitation in patients with hemorrhagic shock may worsen hypotension and precipitate cardiac arrest. In severely injured patients, a paradigm shift should be considered, which prioritizes restoration of circulation before ETI and positive pressure ventilation while maintaining a focus on basic airway assessment and noninvasive airway interventions. For this patient population, the most reasonable current strategy may be to target a simultaneous resuscitation approach, with immediate efforts to control hemorrhage and provide basic airway interventions while prioritizing volume resuscitation with blood products and deferring ETI until adequate systemic perfusion has been attained. We believe that a circulation-first sequence will improve both survival and neurologic outcomes for a traumatically injured patient and will continue to advocate this approach, as additional clinical evidence is generated to inform how to best tailor circulation-first resuscitation for varied injury patterns and patient populations.

Comparison of times of intervention during pediatric CPR maneuvers using ABC and CAB sequences: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The proposed introduction of the CAB (circulation, airway, breathing) sequence for cardiopulmonary resuscitation has raised some perplexity within the pediatric community. We designed a randomized trial intended to verify if and how much timing of intervention in pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation is affected by the use of the CAB vs. the ABC (airway, breathing, circulation) sequence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

340 volunteers, paired into 170 two-person teams, performed 2-rescuer healthcare provider BLS with both a CAB and ABC sequence. Their performances were audio-video recorded and times of intervention in the two scenarios, cardiac and respiratory arrest, were monitored.

RESULTS

The CAB sequence compared to ABC prompts quicker recognition of respiratory (CAB vs. ABC=17.48 ± 2.19 vs. 19.17 ± 2.38s; p<0.05) or cardiac arrest (CAB vs. ABC=17.48 ± 2.19 vs. 41.67 ± 4.95; p<0.05) and faster start of ventilatory maneuvers (CAB vs. ABC=19.13 ± 1.47s vs. 22.66 ± 3.07; p<0.05) or chest compressions (CAB vs. ABC=19.27 ± 2.64 vs. 43.40 ± 5.036; p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to ABC the CAB sequence prompts shorter time of intervention both in diagnosing respiratory or cardiac arrest and in starting ventilation or chest compression. However, this does not necessarily entail prompter resumption of spontaneous circulation and significant reduction of neurological sequelae, an issue that requires further studies.