Suppr超能文献

使用阻抗阈值设备结合我们新型的粘性手套装置进行 ACD-CPR 并不会增加胸部减压。

Use of impedance threshold device in conjunction with our novel adhesive glove device for ACD-CPR does not result in additional chest decompression.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, College of Veterinarian School, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.

出版信息

Resuscitation. 2013 Oct;84(10):1433-8. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2013.05.019. Epub 2013 Jun 2.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the hemodynamic effects of using an adhesive glove device (AGD) to perform active compression-decompression CPR (AGD-CPR) in conjunction with an impedance threshold device (ITD) in a pediatric cardiac arrest model.

DESIGN

Controlled, randomized animal study.

METHODS

In this study, 18 piglets were anesthetized, ventilated, and continuously monitored. After 3min of untreated ventricular fibrillation, animals were randomized (6/group) to receive either standard CPR (S-CPR), active compression-decompression CPR via adhesive glove device (AGD-CPR) or AGD-CPR along with an ITD (AGD-CPR+ITD) for 2min at 100-120compressions/min. AGD is delivered using a fingerless leather glove with a Velcro patch on the palmer aspect and the counter Velcro patch adhered to the pig's chest. Data (mean±SD) were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with pair wise multiple comparisons to assess differences between groups. p-Value≤0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Both AGD-CPR and AGD-CPR+ITD groups produced lower intrathoracic pressure (IttP, mmHg) during decompression phase (-13.4±6.7, p=0.01 and -11.9±6.5, p=0.01, respectively) in comparison to S-CPR (-0.3±4.2). Carotid blood flow (CBF, % of baseline mL/min) was higher in AGD-CPR and AGD-CPR+ITD (respectively 64.3±47.3%, p=0.03 and 67.5±33.1%, p=0.04) as compared with S-CPR (29.1±12.5%). Coronary perfusion pressure (CPP, mmHg) was higher in AGD-CPR and AGD-CPR+ITD (respectively 19.7±4.6, p=0.04 and 25.6±12.1, p=0.02) when compared to S-CPR (9.6±9.1). There was no statistically significant difference between AGD-CPR and AGD-CPR+ITD groups with reference to intra-thoracic pressure, carotid blood flow and coronary perfusion pressure.

CONCLUSION

Active compression decompression delivered by this simple and inexpensive adhesive glove device resulted in improved cerebral blood flow and coronary perfusion pressure. There was no statistically significant added effect of ITD use along with AGD-CPR on the decompression of the chest.

摘要

目的

评估在小儿心搏骤停模型中使用粘性手套装置(AGD)进行主动按压-释放心肺复苏(AGD-CPR)联合阻抗阈设备(ITD)的血流动力学效果。

设计

对照、随机动物研究。

方法

在这项研究中,18 头小猪被麻醉、通气并持续监测。在未经治疗的心室颤动 3 分钟后,动物随机分为 6 组(每组 6 只),分别接受标准心肺复苏(S-CPR)、粘性手套装置(AGD-CPR)的主动按压-释放心肺复苏或 AGD-CPR 联合 ITD(AGD-CPR+ITD)治疗 2 分钟,频率为 100-120 次/分。AGD 通过使用带有魔术贴搭扣的无指皮手套来实现,掌侧有魔术贴搭扣,猪的胸部贴有反面魔术贴。使用单向方差分析和两两多重比较来评估组间差异,对数据(均值±标准差)进行分析。p 值≤0.05 被认为具有统计学意义。

结果

与 S-CPR 相比,AGD-CPR 和 AGD-CPR+ITD 组在释放阶段的胸腔内压力(IttP,mmHg)更低(分别为-13.4±6.7,p=0.01 和-11.9±6.5,p=0.01)。颈动脉血流(CBF,基础值的% mL/min)在 AGD-CPR 和 AGD-CPR+ITD 组中更高(分别为 64.3±47.3%,p=0.03 和 67.5±33.1%,p=0.04),而 S-CPR 组为 29.1±12.5%。AGD-CPR 和 AGD-CPR+ITD 组的冠状动脉灌注压(CPP,mmHg)高于 S-CPR 组(分别为 19.7±4.6,p=0.04 和 25.6±12.1,p=0.02),分别为 9.6±9.1。AGD-CPR 和 AGD-CPR+ITD 组之间的胸腔内压力、颈动脉血流和冠状动脉灌注压没有统计学上的显著差异。

结论

这种简单且经济实惠的粘性手套装置实施的主动按压-释放可改善脑血流和冠状动脉灌注压。AGD-CPR 联合 ITD 应用于胸部按压的释放没有统计学上的显著附加效果。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验