We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
A quantitative comparison of physiologic indicators of cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality: Diastolic blood pressure versus end-tidal carbon dioxide.
Resuscitation 2016 July
AIM: The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends monitoring invasive arterial diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) when available. In intensive care unit patients, both may be available to the rescuer. The objective of this study was to compare DBP vs. ETCO2 during CPR as predictors of cardiac arrest survival.
METHODS: In two models of cardiac arrest (primary ventricular fibrillation [VF] and asphyxia-associated VF), 3-month old swine received either standard AHA guideline-based CPR or patient-centric, BP-guided CPR. Mean values of DBP and ETCO2 in the final 2min before the first defibrillation attempt were compared using receiver operating characteristic curves (area under curve [AUC] analysis). The optimal DBP cut point to predict survival was derived and subsequently validated in two independent, randomly generated cohorts.
RESULTS: Of 60 animals, 37 (61.7%) survived to 45min. DBP was higher in survivors than in non-survivors (40.6±1.8mmHg vs. 25.9±2.4mmHg; p<0.001), while ETCO2 was not different (30.0±1.5mmHg vs. 32.5±1.8mmHg; p=0.30). By AUC analysis, DBP was superior to ETCO2 (0.82 vs. 0.60; p=0.025) in discriminating survivors from non-survivors. The optimal DBP cut point in the derivation cohort was 34.1mmHg. In the validation cohort, this cut point demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.78, specificity of 0.81, positive predictive value of 0.64, and negative predictive value of 0.89 for survival.
CONCLUSIONS: In both primary and asphyxia-associated VF porcine models of cardiac arrest, DBP discriminates survivors from non-survivors better than ETCO2. Failure to attain a DBP >34mmHg during CPR is highly predictive of non-survival.
METHODS: In two models of cardiac arrest (primary ventricular fibrillation [VF] and asphyxia-associated VF), 3-month old swine received either standard AHA guideline-based CPR or patient-centric, BP-guided CPR. Mean values of DBP and ETCO2 in the final 2min before the first defibrillation attempt were compared using receiver operating characteristic curves (area under curve [AUC] analysis). The optimal DBP cut point to predict survival was derived and subsequently validated in two independent, randomly generated cohorts.
RESULTS: Of 60 animals, 37 (61.7%) survived to 45min. DBP was higher in survivors than in non-survivors (40.6±1.8mmHg vs. 25.9±2.4mmHg; p<0.001), while ETCO2 was not different (30.0±1.5mmHg vs. 32.5±1.8mmHg; p=0.30). By AUC analysis, DBP was superior to ETCO2 (0.82 vs. 0.60; p=0.025) in discriminating survivors from non-survivors. The optimal DBP cut point in the derivation cohort was 34.1mmHg. In the validation cohort, this cut point demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.78, specificity of 0.81, positive predictive value of 0.64, and negative predictive value of 0.89 for survival.
CONCLUSIONS: In both primary and asphyxia-associated VF porcine models of cardiac arrest, DBP discriminates survivors from non-survivors better than ETCO2. Failure to attain a DBP >34mmHg during CPR is highly predictive of non-survival.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app