Pepe Paul E, Fowler Raymond L, Roppolo Lynn P, Wigginton Jane G
Professor of Medicine, Surgery, Public Health and Riggs Family Chair in Emergency Medicine, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and the Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Crit Care. 2004 Feb;8(1):41-5. doi: 10.1186/cc2379. Epub 2003 Sep 29.
Despite well developed emergency medical services with rapid response advanced life support capabilities, survival rates following out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation (VF) have remained bleak in many venues. Generally, these poor resuscitation rates are attributed to delays in the performance of basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders or delays in defibrillation, but recent laboratory data suggest that the current standard of immediately providing a countershock as the first therapeutic intervention may be detrimental when VF is prolonged beyond several minutes. Several studies now suggest that when myocardial energy supplies begin to dwindle following more prolonged periods of VF, improvements in coronary artery perfusion must first be achieved in order to prime the heart for successful return of spontaneous circulation after defibrillation. Therefore, before countershocks, certain pharmacologic and/or mechanical interventions might take precedence during resuscitative efforts. This evolving concept has been substantiated recently by clinical studies, including a controlled clinical trial, demonstrating a significant improvement in survival when basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation is provided for several minutes before the initial countershock. Although this evolving concept differs from current standards and may pose a potential problem for automated defibrillator initiatives (e.g. public access defibrillation), successful defibrillation and return of spontaneous circulation have been rendered more predictable by evolving technologies that can score the VF waveform signal and differentiate between those who can be shocked immediately and those who should receive other interventions first.
尽管紧急医疗服务已高度发达,具备快速响应的高级生命支持能力,但在许多地方,院外心室颤动(VF)后的生存率仍然不容乐观。一般来说,这些复苏率不佳归因于旁观者进行基本心肺复苏的延迟或除颤延迟,但最近的实验室数据表明,当VF持续超过几分钟时,目前将立即提供电击作为首要治疗干预措施的标准可能是有害的。现在有几项研究表明,在较长时间的VF后心肌能量供应开始减少时,必须首先改善冠状动脉灌注,以便为心脏在除颤后成功恢复自主循环做好准备。因此,在电击之前,某些药物和/或机械干预措施在复苏努力中可能应优先进行。这一不断演变的概念最近已得到临床研究的证实,包括一项对照临床试验,该试验表明在首次电击前进行几分钟的基本心肺复苏时生存率有显著提高。尽管这一不断演变的概念与当前标准不同,可能给自动体外除颤器计划(如公众可获取除颤)带来潜在问题,但通过能够对VF波形信号进行评分并区分哪些人可以立即电击以及哪些人应首先接受其他干预措施的不断发展的技术,成功除颤和自主循环恢复已变得更可预测。