Comparison of Mechanical Techniques of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Survival and Neurologic Outcome in Dogs

Kern KB, Carter AB, Showen RL, et al American Journal of Emergency Medicine 1987 Vol 5 Pages 190-195

The ultimate goal of resuscitation is survival with normal neurologic function. Most comparisons of different methods of CPR have concentrated on hemodynamic advantages or improved blood flow. The authors chose instead, a canine cardiac arrest model comparing the important resuscitation end points of hemodynamics, 24-hour survival and neurologic deficit. Three currently available mechanical adjuncts for CPR were compared. A group of 30 large mongrel dogs was divided equally among Thumper CPR, simultaneous compression and ventilation (SCV) CPR, and vest CPR. Ventricular Fibrillation was induced electrically. After 3 minutes without intervention, one of three types of mechanical CPR was performed for 17 minutes followed by a 10 minute period of Advanced Life Support. SCV and Vest CPR produced significantly greater aortic and right atrial systolic pressures than Thumper CPR (p<.03). The SCV technique also produced significantly higher aortic diastolic pressure and right atrial diastolic pressure than either of the other methods (p<.03). However, coronary perfusion pressure was not different among the three mechanical methods. No differences in immediate resuscitation (7/10 Thumper, 8/10 Vest, 7/10 SCV), 24-hour survival (4/10 Thumper, 5/10 SCV, 1/10 Vest), or 24-hour neurolgic deficit scores were found. The authors conclude that neither SCV or Vest CPR appear better for survival or neurologic outcome than standard CPR performed with the Thumper.