Manual versus mechanical chest compression in in-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective cohort in emergency department patients

Mechanical versus manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR): an umbrella review of contemporary systematic reviews and more

BACKGROUND

High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can restore spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and neurological function and save lives. We conducted an umbrella review, including previously published systematic reviews (SRs), that compared mechanical and manual CPR; after that, we performed a new SR of the original studies that were not included after the last published SR to provide a panoramic view of the existing evidence on the effectiveness of CPR methods.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline were searched, including English in-hospital (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) SRs, and comparing mechanical versus manual CPR. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) and GRADE were used to assess the quality of included SRs/studies. We included both IHCA and OHCA, which compared mechanical and manual CPR. We analyzed at least one of the outcomes of interest, including ROSC, survival to hospital admission, survival to hospital discharge, 30-day survival, and survival to hospital discharge with good neurological function. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were performed for age, gender, initial rhythm, arrest location, and type of CPR devices.

RESULTS

We identified 249 potentially relevant records, of which 238 were excluded. Eleven SRs were analyzed in the Umbrella review (January 2014-March 2022). Furthermore, for a new, additional SR, we identified eight eligible studies (not included in any prior SR) for an in-depth analysis between April 1, 2021, and February 15, 2024. The higher chances of using mechanical CPR for male patients were significantly observed in three studies. Two studies showed that younger patients received more mechanical treatment than older patients. However, studies did not comment on the outcomes based on the patient's gender or age. Most SRs and studies were of low to moderate quality. The pooled findings did not show the superiority of mechanical compared to manual CPR except in a few selected subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the significant heterogeneity and methodological limitations of the included studies and SRs, our findings do not provide definitive evidence to support the superiority of mechanical CPR over manual CPR. However, mechanical CPR can serve better where high-quality manual CPR cannot be performed in selected situations.

Comparative Analysis of Perfusion Index and End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide in Cardiac Arrest Patients: Implications for Hemodynamic Monitoring and Resuscitation Outcomes

BACKGROUND

During cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), some parameters (e.g., intraarterial pressure measurement and end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2)) indicate the quality and outcome of resuscitation. These parameters are generally based on monitoring the hemodynamic status. Perfusion index (PI) is a calculation from the photoplethysmography (PPG) signal and displays the proportion of pulsatile to non-pulsatile light absorption or reflection in the PPG signal. It helps to evaluate cardiac output and tissue perfusion in the care of a critical patient. Its most important advantages are that it can be easily measured with a pulse oximeter probe attached to the finger (non-invasive), can be objectively repeated, can be applied quickly, and is inexpensive. Normal PI values range from 0.2% to 20%. Despite being recognized as a valuable indicator of hemodynamics, there is limited information regarding its relevance in patients experiencing cardiac arrest. Although the PI is known to be a valuable parameter to indicate hemodynamics, information about its value in cardiac arrest patients is limited. This study aims to evaluate the performance of PI and EtCO2 in predicting the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) among cardiac arrest patients.

METHODS

This was a single-center, prospective, observational clinical study including both out-of-hospital and in-hospital adult cardiac arrest patients. The study was conducted from November 1, 2018 to April 30, 2019 at the Emergency Department (ED) of the Hacettepe University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. The EtCO2 values of the patients were recorded at the time they were intubated (t0) and every five minutes (t5, t10, t15...) during CPR. Along with these measurements, PI values were measured with the Masimo Signal Extraction Technology device (Masimo, California, United States). The study's primary outcome was PI's performance in predicting the ROSC among cardiac arrest patients. The secondary outcomes of the study were the performance of EtCO2 in predicting the ROSC among cardiac arrest patients and the association between PI and EtCO2 values.

RESULTS

We included a total of 100 cases. The mean age of patients was 70.4 ± 13.4 years, and 65% were male. The ROSC was achieved in 29 patients. There was no statistical difference in PI values between the ROSC (+) and ROSC (-) groups at any minute. However, in the ROSC (+) group, EtCO2 values were observed to be high starting from the fifth minute (t5, p=0.010; t10, p<0.001; t15, p=0.014; t20, p=0.033; t25, p=0.003, respectively). There was no correlation between the PI and EtCO2 values at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 minutes (t0, p=0.436; t5, p=0.154; t10, p=0.557; t15, p=0.740; t20 p=0.241; t25 p=0.201, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Measuring PI values during resuscitation in intubated cardiac arrest patients does not help clinicians predict the outcome. In addition, no correlation was found with EtCO2 values. However, EtCO2 values remained high in patients with the ROSC from the fifth minute onward. Further larger-scale studies are needed regarding the optimal use of PI in cardiac arrest patients.