Comparison of outcome of cardiopulmonary resuscitation with AutoPulse and LUCAS in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patient
- Author:
June Seob BYUN
1
;
In Soo CHO
;
Chul Min HA
Author Information
1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Hanil Hospital, Seoul, Korea. quswnstjq10@naver.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation;
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest;
Hospital emergency service
- MeSH:
Allied Health Personnel;
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation;
Defibrillators;
Emergency Service, Hospital;
Humans;
Hydrogen-Ion Concentration;
Intensive Care Units;
Intubation;
Lactic Acid;
Length of Stay;
Leukocytes;
Neutrophils;
Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest;
Retrospective Studies;
Thorax
- From:Journal of the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine
2019;30(1):16-21
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to compare the outcome of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with AutoPulse and LUCAS in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. METHODS: Between July 2017 and March 2018, a total of 152 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients were included for analysis. Included patients were divided into an AutoPulse group and LUCAS group. Patient's age, sex, bystander CPR, witness arrest, initial shockable rhythm, time from arrest to CPR, pre-hospital CPR duration, in-hospital CPR duration, automatic external defibrillator operation by paramedic, intubation by paramedic, intravenous line access by paramedic and target temperature management were reviewed retrospectively. In addition, blood pH, lactate level, white blood cell (WBC) count, and delta neutrophil index (DNI) were analyzed. Additionally, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, complications from chest compressions, and cerebral performance category (CPC) scale at discharge were analyzed. RESULTS: No differences in initial shockable rhythm, patient characteristics, management for patients and CPR duration were observed between the two groups. ROSC were significantly higher in the LUCAS group than the AutoPulse group (17.9 vs. 34.7%, P=0.025). However, hospital and ICU length of stay, CPC scale at discharge as clinical outcome and pH, lactate level, WBC count, and DNI as laboratory outcomes were not significantly different between the AutoPulse group and LUCAS group. Although the case numbers were scarce, complications from chest compressions were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: CPR using LUCAS showed better ROSC than CPR using AutoPulse. However, hospital and ICU length of stay and CPC scale at discharge did not differ between the two groups.
