Eichhorn S, Mendoza Garcia A, Polski M, Spindler J, Stroh A, Heller M, Lange R, Krane M
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Division of Experimental Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Munich Heart Alliance, Lazarettstrasse 36, 80636, Munich, Germany.
Fakultät für Informatik, Robotics and Embedded Systems, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2017 Jun;40(2):441-447. doi: 10.1007/s13246-017-0537-3. Epub 2017 Mar 3.
The provision of sufficient chest compression is among the most important factors influencing patient survival during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). One approach to optimize the quality of chest compressions is to use mechanical-resuscitation devices. The aim of this study was to compare a new device for chest compression (corpuls cpr) with an established device (LUCAS II). We used a mechanical thorax model consisting of a chest with variable stiffness and an integrated heart chamber which generated blood flow dependent on the compression depth and waveform. The method of blood-flow generation could be changed between direct cardiac-compression mode and thoracic-pump mode. Different chest-stiffness settings and compression modes were tested to generate various blood-flow profiles. Additionally, an endurance test at high stiffness was performed to measure overall performance and compression consistency. Both resuscitation machines were able to compress the model thorax with a frequency of 100/min and a depth of 5 cm, independent of the chosen chest stiffness. Both devices passed the endurance test without difficulty. The corpuls cpr device was able to generate about 10-40% more blood flow than the LUCAS II device, depending on the model settings. In most scenarios, the corpuls cpr device also generated a higher blood pressure than the LUCAS II. The peak compression forces during CPR were about 30% higher using the corpuls cpr device than with the LUCAS II. In this study, the corpuls cpr device had improved blood flow and pressure outcomes than the LUCAS II device. Further examination in an animal model is required to prove the findings of this preliminary study.
在心肺复苏（CPR）过程中，提供足够的胸外按压是影响患者生存的最重要因素之一。优化胸外按压质量的一种方法是使用机械复苏设备。本研究的目的是比较一种新型胸外按压设备（corpuls cpr）与一种已有的设备（LUCAS II）。我们使用了一个机械胸腔模型，该模型由一个具有可变刚度的胸部和一个集成的心脏腔室组成，心脏腔室根据按压深度和波形产生血流。血流产生的方法可以在直接心脏按压模式和胸泵模式之间切换。测试了不同的胸部刚度设置和按压模式，以产生各种血流曲线。此外，还进行了高刚度下的耐力测试，以测量整体性能和按压一致性。两种复苏机器都能够以每分钟100次的频率和5厘米的深度按压模型胸腔，与所选的胸部刚度无关。两种设备都轻松通过了耐力测试。根据模型设置，corpuls cpr设备能够比LUCAS II设备多产生约10%-40%的血流。在大多数情况下，corpuls cpr设备产生的血压也高于LUCAS II。使用corpuls cpr设备进行心肺复苏时的峰值按压力比使用LUCAS II时高约30%。在本研究中，corpuls cpr设备比LUCAS II设备具有更好的血流和压力结果。需要在动物模型中进行进一步检查，以证实这项初步研究的结果。
